CHAPTER XXI

PARTICLES ( ) I. Scope. The word particle is a Latin diminutive particula (c!" #rench particule) !rom pars" It is a small part o! somethin$" Lon$inus terms this part o! speech with the notion that it was a word placed %eside another" &o portion o! s'nta( is treated with so little satis!action in the $rammars" The $rammarians are not a$reed as to what parts o! speech should %e called )particles"* Riemann and +oel,er- treat under this term (Les Particules) ne$ative particles particles o! comparison and prepositions" .annaris/ includes prepositions con0unctions and ne$ative particles" 12hner3+erth4 here discuss con0unctions prepositions and the modal adver%s thou$h the' use the phrase )die so$enannten Parti5eln"* 6lass7 almost con!ines the discussion o! particles to con0unctions" He ma5es the two terms e8uivalent9 )Particles (Con0unctions)"* :iner; uses the word %roadl' to cover all adver%s prepositions and con0unctions" <onro= limits the desi$nation to certain con0unctions and adver%s )that are mainl' used to show the relation %etween other words and %etween clauses"* 6ut he does not treat all con0unctions (paratactic and h'potactic) nor all modal adver%s" He passes %' prepositions" 6ru$mann> sees clearl' that as there is no real distinction %etween adver%s and prepositions so there is no !ast line ()5eine !este +ren,e*) %etween )particles* and other adver%s" All lan$ua$es have a lar$e $roup o! words that pass over into the
Riemann and Goelzer RIEMANN and GOELZER, +rammaire Compar?e du +rec et du Latin. I (1897), II (1901). 1 !nt., "". 80#$8#0. %annari& %ANNARI , A. N., A 'i&tori(al Gree) Grammar (1897). ***, On t+e ,r-e Meanin. o/ t+e (0la&&. Re1., 1902, "". 92 //.). # 'i&t. G). Gr., "". 234$522. 67+ner8Gert+ 69'NER8GER,', Aus!" +ramm" d" $riech" Spr" 4" Au!l" o! 12hner" Tl" II 6de" I, II (1898, 1905). 2 II, "". 112$257. 5 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., "". #49$#74. :iner :INER, G. ;., @e ver%orum cum praep" compos" in &" T" Asu (1825$1852). ***, +ramm" d" neut" Sprachidioms (-B//)" >" Au!l" von L2nemann (l837). 4 :.8,+., "". 243$41#. Monro MONRO, <. ;., 'omeri( Grammar (188#). #d ed. (1891). =ir&t ed. -&ed. 3 'om. Gr., "". #50$#39. ;r-.mann

cate$or' o! particles %ut 6ru$mann cuts the +ordian 5not %' declarin$ that it is not a !unction o! scienti!ic $rammar to delimit these words" That is a matter o! su%0ective standpoint" He ta5es little interest in the various su%divisions o! the particles %ut he e(tends the term to its widest sense to cover all modal adver%s prepositions and con0unctions" 6ru$mann notes that man' o! these particles $o %ac5 to the Indo3 +ermanic time and hence their et'molo$' is un5nown" He treats the particles !rom the standpoint o! their ori$in so !ar as 5nown" Hartun$- ta5es a much narrower view o! particles" He discusses the paratactic con0unctions and the intensive particles" He/ conceives that the $reater portion o! the particles have no meanin$ in themselves %ut are merel' modi!ications on other words or on whole sentences" This is not strictl' correct" :e are not alwa's a%le to discover the ori$inal import o! these words %ut it is pro%a%le that the' ori$inall' had a de!inite meanin$" It is true that the particles are all su%ordinated to other words in various wa's" In a %road wa' it ma' %e stated that there are !our classes o! words (ver%s nouns pronouns particles) in the sentence" #rom this point o! view the word particle covers all the adver%s prepositions con0unctions and inter0ections" 6ut it is impossi%le as 6ru$mann holds to ma5e a per!ectl' scienti!ic treatment o! the particles without much overlappin$" The inter0ections in one sense do not %elon$ to $rammar" The ne$ative and the interro$ative particles cannot %e properl' treated under adver%s thou$h the' are adver%s" So also con0unctions are adver%s %ut a $ood deal more" Intensive particles a$ain are adver%s %ut more" It is not worth while to recount the stor' o! the adver%s and the prepositions at this sta$e" The' are particles %ut the' have received su!!icient discussion in special chapters" In the same wa' the construction o! h'potactic con0unctions came in !or somewhat care!ul treatment in connection with su%ordinate sentences under <ode" Hence h'potactic con0unctions do not here demand as much discussion as the paratactic con0unctions" Cne has to %e to a certain e(tent ar%itrar' in this !ield since the $round is so e(tensive and so much remains to %e done" There is still need o! a modern and e(haustive treatise on the +ree5 Particles" It was in ->=D that the @utch scholar Hoo$eveen4 wrote his %oo5" He was !ollowed %' Hartun$"7 1lot,; rewor5ed the writin$s o! @evarius" In -B=- 6Eumlein
;R>GMANN, 6., Element& o/ 0om"arati1e Grammar o/ t+e Indo8Germani( Lan.-a.e& (tran&lation ?! :ri.+t, 1894). ***, +riechische +rammati5" 4" Au!l" (1900), t+e ed. @-oted. Fierte vermehrte Au!l" o/ A. ,+-m? (1912). ***, +rundriG der ver$l" +r" d" indo$" Sprachen" /" Au!l" 6de" I, II (1897$1912). ***, 1ur,e ver$leichende +rammati5 der indo$ermanischen Sprachen (1905). 7 Grie(+. Gr., "". 4#4$440. 'art-n. 'AR,>NG, %. A., Lehre von den Parti5eln der $riech" Spr", I, II (182#$1822). 1 Lehre von den Parti5eln der $riech" Spr", ,l. I, 182#A ,l. II, 1822. # I?., ,l. I, ". 27. (+roeder (H%er die !ormelle Antersch" der Redet", 1875, ". 24 /.) Brite& Bell on t+e o?&(-rit! o/ t+e ori.in o/ "arti(le& and t+e -&e o/ t+e term. 2 @octrina Particularum Lin$uae +raecae" Ed" Secunda , 1803. 5 ee a?o1e.

produced his Untersuchungen ber griech. Partikeln" Pale'- has carried the wor5 on as has &avarre"/ There are to %e sure a $reat num%er o! mono$raphs on special $roups or on sin$le particles"4 )I! an' particular section o! +ree5 $rammar were ta5en as a specimen to illustrate the historical evolution o! the +ree5 lan$ua$e no %etter representative could %e selected than the section o! the particles"*7 .annaris spea5s thus not %ecause the $rammars have treated the particles with such s5ill %ut %ecause the particles %est show the $rowth and deca' o! parallel words %e!ore other new s'non'ms that are constantl' comin$ into e(istence" The particles come to a sharp point and $raduall' lose the ed$e and whittle down into platitudes" Then the' $ive wa' to others with more !reshness" In $eneral the particles mar5 the histor' o! the e!!ort to relate words with each other clause with clause sentence with sentence para$raph with para$raph" The' are the hin$es o! speech the 0oints o! lan$ua$e or the delicate turns o! e(pression the nuances o! thou$ht that are o!ten untranslata%le" :e must here con!ine our attention to Intensive Particles &e$ative Particles Interro$ative Particles Con0unctions and Inter0ections" This order is chosen !or lo$ical reasons simpl' not %ecause this was the order o! development" That we do not 5now" The particles that are lin5ed to sin$le words lo$icall' come %e!ore con0unctions which have to do with clauses and sentences" Inter0ections stand apart and so are put last in the list" Some o! the particles are emplo'ed with words clauses and sentences (li5e , , ) so that a strict division on this %asis is not possi%le"; II. Intensive or Emphatic Particles ( or !"#! according to Dionysius Thrax)" -" LI<ITATIC&S" Here a$ain there is no a%solute a$reement as to what particles are considered )emphatic* or )intensive"* :iner indeed has no separate discussion o! the intensive particles li5e $#, #" He admits= that while the +ree5 o! the &" T" uses adver%s well in an extensive sense it is de!ective in the intensive use" Adver%s o! place

4 @e +raecae Lin$uae Particulis, 1ol. I, 1850A II, 185#. ;C-mlein ;D>MLEIN, Antersuchun$en 2%er die $riech" <odi und die Parti5eln und (1853). ***, Antersuch" 2%er $riech" Parti5eln (1831). Eale! EALEF, Gree) Earti(le& and t+eir 0om?ination& (1881). 1 ,+e G). Earti(le&, 1881. Na1arre NAGARRE, Itude sur les particules $rec8ues (R. E. A., 1ii, "". 113$120). # Itudes sur les particules $rec8ues, R. E. A., GII, "". 113$120. 2 0/. '7?ner. +rundr" ,u Forlesun$en 2%er die $riech" S'nt" , "". 70$87. 5 %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 234. 4 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #50. 3 :.8,+., ". 53#.

time manner all come in a%undance in the &" T" Thompson> !ollows :iner in the a%sence o! discussion o! the intensive particles" The intensive particles in !act as a rule receive poor handlin$ in the $rammars"- 6ut Pale'/ properl' sees that the' are )an ela%oratel' !inished part o! a most comple( and %eauti!ul machiner'"* Poetr' especiall' tra$ic poetr' uses these emphatic particles more than other 5inds o! writin$" In Homer )the' sustain and articulate the pulses o! emotion" 6' them alone we can perceive that +ree5 was the lan$ua$e o! a witt' re!ined intellectual sensitive and passionate people" It would %e impossi%le in an' %oo5 to ta%ulate the delicate shades o! meanin$ the su%tle intricate touches o! iron' or pathos the indescri%a%le $race and power which the particles lend to man' o! the $randest passa$es in ancient literature"*4 It is onl' %' a close stud' o! the entire conte(t that these can %e !elt" The' can never %e !ull' translated !rom one lan$ua$e to another" Thus it is impossi%le to reproduce in En$lish the various shades o! meanin$ o! and when in contrast" )The attempt to translate a particle leads to curious results" @r" C'ril .ac5son used alwa's to render %&' ( %' Jthe Tro0ans God help them K and a !ormer head3master o! Eton alwa's distin$uished %etween ! JSir to youK and Jat your serviceK* (Colerid$e Greek !lassic Poets p" //-)"7 Indeed it is not possi%le to put into mere written lan$ua$e all that the loo5 the $esture the tone o! voice the emphasis o! the accent carried when heard and seen" C!" a #renchman in conversation" The spo5en vernacular thus has all the advanta$e o! the written st'le" All the vernacular cannot %e reproduced on the pa$e" C!" the charm o! the actual speech o! .esus and Paul" The &" T" is in the vernacular %ut even so it does not reproduce to an' $reat e(tent the witcher' o! the old +ree5 particles" Time has worn them down ver' much" Still we do !ind them here and there" There is a $ood e(ample in Ph" 49B )* + $# ,$-" So also #. ' / (Ro" -9-L) and 0 )$1 2' (49>)" C!" P" 6" <" 7/ (6"C" -=B) 3 4 )5 # and C" P" --=7 ; (viMvii A"@") 3 4 + )* " This shows that Paul at least 5new how to indicate the !iner shades o! thou$ht %' means o! the +ree5 particles" 6lass; notes that in comparison with the Semitic lan$ua$es the &" T" seems to ma5e e(cessive use o! the particles poor as the showin$ is in comparison with the classic period" )<odern +ree5 has lost the classical +ree5 wealth o! connective and other particles which lend nicet' and precision o! thou$ht" Cnl' 67#, 38, / and the less commonl' used con0unctions )9, , :' have %een retained" The loss o! $9, has %een compensated %' new !ormationsN %ut the ancient +ree5 , , ;, , , 6$-8, 0, , $, have le!t no successors* (Thum% "andb. p" -B;)" The pap'ri seem %arren o! intensive particles in comparison with the older +ree5" .annaris- o%serves how these postpositive particles ($, , , , and their compounds) tend in the later +ree5
,+om"&on ,'OME ON, =. E., A !ntaH o/ Atti( Gree). NeB ed. (1907). 7 !nt. o/ Atti( G). 1 Eale!, ,+e G). Earti(le&, ". 1i. # I?., ". iH. 2 =arrar, G). !nt., ". 194. 5 I?. 4 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #49. ,+-m?

either to disappear or to %ecome prepositive" The &" T" is in harmon' with this result" The same thin$ occurs with which sometimes %ecomes prepositive %ut that is not true o! $9, , " @ion'sius Thra(/ has a ver' e(tensive list o! )e(pletive particles* or !"#! 6#<! + =#> , (9, ", -, , , , , , ?, , , , -, , , $, )9, , @, $-8" Some o! these (li5e , , )9 and one mi$ht add $9, ) are so prevailin$l' con0unctival that the' are %est treated under con0unctions" Cthers (li5e , (9) %elon$ to earlier sta$es o! the lan$ua$e" The discussion o! could have come here ver' well since it is undou%tedl' intensive whatever its actual meanin$ whether it is %lended with #< into 9 or used with :', :!', =, :', 2' etc" or used with the ver% itsel! in the apodosis o! a condition" It is a modal adver% o! emphasis (now de!inite as in Rev" B9- now inde!inite as in <t" /49-B)" It is li5e a chameleon and $ets its colour !rom its environment or !rom its var'in$ moods" This !ic5leness o! meanin$ is true o! all the intensive particles" Indeed @ion'sius Thra( is rather sli$htin$ in his description o! these words :! A#' 3+ B##C " 7# 4 D!#' @" He contradicts his dispara$ement %' the use o! in this ver' sentence" The adver%ial nature o! the intensive particles is well shown %' the variet' o! usa$e o! the modal adver% E'" See Tha'erKs Lexicon !or the &" T" illustrations which are ver' numerous (some /LL)" In .o" 79= F# E' G $G we have a $ood e(ample o! the possi%ilities o! E'" The local adver% " dwindles !rom JsomewhereK (He%" /9=) to JsomewhatK in Ro" 79-D" C!" also @ (Jsurel'K) in He%" /9-=" Some o! the temporal adver%s also at times approach the emphatic particles" C!" H A in Ph"

,'>M;, A., @ie #orsch" 2%er die hellen" Spr" in den .ahren 190#$1905 (Ar(+. /. Ea". 2, "". 552$ 572). ***, @ie $riech" Sprache im Oeitalter des Hellenismus (1901). ***, @ie sprach$esch" Stell" des %i%l" +riech" (,+eol. R-nd., 190#). ***, Hand%uch der $riech" <ial. (1909). ***, Hand%uch d" neu$riech" Fol5ssprache" /" Au!l" (1910). ***, Hand%uch des Sans5rits. I, Grammati) (1904). ***, Anters" 2%er d" Sp" Asper im +riech" (1889). 1 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 500. # 0/. >+li.I& ed., ". 93, and (+ol. <ion. ,+raH in ;e)). An., 970. 10. ,+a!er ,'AFER, %. '., Gree)8En.li&+ LeHi(on o/ t+e N. ,. (1887). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ t+e N. ,. ('a&tin.&I <. ;., 1900).

49-N 79B (see 1enned' in loco) almost4P" 6ut in the &" T" and / are alwa's strictl' temporal" However sometimes loses its notion o! Jonce upon a timeK (+al" -9/4) and !ades into that o! JeverK as in - Cor" D9>N Eph" ;9/D" In / (Ro" -9-LN Ph" 79-L) it is more the notion o! culmination (Jnow at lastK) than o! time" 6ut in # the notion o! time ma' %e wholl' $one %e!ore that o! contin$enc' (Jlest perchanceK) as in Lu" -/9;B" In the &" T" we !ind undou%ted instances o! the non3temporal use o! - and @ where the sense di!!ers little !rom or " Some o! the passa$es are in dou%t" 6ut the lo$ical and emotional use as distinct !rom the temporal is clear in .o" -;9// /7 where - $ives the contrast to the precedin$ conditions J%ut as it is"K C!" also - .o" /9/B -, # where .ohnKs emotional appeal is sharpened %' the use o! -" C!" li5ewise - #- in Ac" >947 (LXX)" C!" - 6" A" ;4L (iMA"@")" In $eneral the &" T" lan$ua$e li5e the En$lish leaves most o! the emotion and !iner shades o! thou$ht to %e %rou$ht out %' the reader himsel!" )The historical %oo5s o! the &" T" and especiall' their dialo$ues and discourses are onl' !ull' and trul' intelli$i%le to us in readin$ them in hi$h voice in the ori$inal +ree5 te(t and in suppl'in$ the intonation the $estures the movement that is to sa' in reconstitutin$ %' the ima$ination the scene itsel!"*/" THE &" T" ILLASTRATIC&S" #a$ I" :e ma' %e$in with $" The ori$in o! $ is %' no means certain" In the 6Qotian @oric and Eleatic dialects it is $9" It seems to correspond/ to the k in the +othic mi-k (+erman mi%ch)" C!" +ree5 J$#" 6ru$mann sees also a 5inship to the g in the Latin ne%g%otium ne%g%legere ne%g%are" Hartun$4 connects it with the adver% F9" It ma' also %e the same word as the Fedic Sans5rit gha which is used in the same wa'"7 C!" !urther &ui in the Latin &ui%dem" It is not so common in the as in the classic Attic (Radermacher '. T. Gr. p" /D)" Its !unction is to %rin$ into prominence the particular word with which it occurs" It is enclitic and so postpositive" The !eelin$s are sharpl' involved when $ is present" It suits the +ree5 ; which )deli$hts in pointed
6enned! 6ENNE<F, '. A. A., Re(ent Re&ear(+ in t+e Lan.-a.e o/ t+e N. ,. (,+e EH"o&. ,., Hii, 1901). ***, o-r(e& o/ N. ,. Gree) (1894). ***, t Ea-l and t+e M!&ter! Reli.ion& (1912). 2 o mod. G)., ,+-m?, 'and?., ". 185. 1 Gitea-, Itude sur le $rec, 1893, ". ii. # 0/. ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 451. 2 Parti5ellehre, I, ". 255 /. 0/. 6.8G., II, "". 171$178. 5 6.8G., II, ". 171. Raderma(+er RA<ERMA0'ER, L., &eut" +rammati5" @as +riechisch des &" T" im Ousammenhan$ mit der Fol5ssprache (1911). 4 Eale!, ,+e G). Earti(le&, ". 15.

8uestions iron' and e8uivocal assent"* 6ut there is no En$lish e8uivalent and it !re8uentl' cannot %e translated at all" Hartun$= sees in $ a comparative element while is cumulative and arithmetical" As a matter o! !act $ %rin$s to the !ore the idea o! the word with which it is used %ut adds no distinctive notion o! its own"- H2%ner/ calls it a concessive particle on a par with :'" 6ut that is not alwa's true o! $" The distinction made %' $ ma' %e either the least important or the most important (Tha'er)" The resultant idea ma' %e Jat least K this much i! no more a concessive notion" :e !ind this to %e the si$ni!icance o! $ in Lu" --9B 9 $# 4 ) 3-" Here however the $ more properl' %elon$s to ) since that is the point not the preposition 9" The same sli$ht variation !rom the classic idiom appears in -B9; 9 $# H D# A 4 D "" The concessive minimi,in$ idea comes out clearl' in .o" 79/ $# K!-' 3A'" See !urther $# and $# in Ac" ->9/> and in particular )9 $# LC #< (- Cor" D9/) where a$ain the ancient idiom would pre!er LC $# Jto 'ou at leastK (i! not to others)" Cnce more note #= $# in Eph" 49/N 79/-N Col" -9/4 and #< + $# in <t" =9-N D9-> etc" There is a 5een touch o! iron' in Ro" D9/L M #, #-$# !N ' #O( C!" $# in <t" ->9/=" Cn the other hand $ means Jthis much K Jas much as this K in other conte(ts" So in Lu" /79/- )9 $# !N P! "' where the ascensive !orce is accented %' , !" and )9 (a!!irmative here not adversative) and the clima( o! the crescendo is reached in $" The same climacteric !orce o! the particles occurs in Ph" 49B )* + $# ,$- 9 F #O" JI $o K sa's Paul Jas !ar as to consider all thin$s to %e loss"K C!" $# in <t" >9/L and $# in Ac" /9-B (.oel 49/)" So we have Q9 $# in Ac" B94L" A !ine e(ample is :' $# - <@ @R- 3 #! (Ro" B94/)" So -L9-B" There is iron' a$ain in S#A $# T!#"!# (- Cor" 79B) and note the position o! $ apart !rom " In Homer $ is ver' common with the pronouns 4 %ut in the &" T" we have onl' :' $# (Ro" B94/)" :e no more !ind 0$ $# %ut $1 (<t" 49--) $?;!" (49-7) $1 (;9//) 3H' $? (Ro" D94)" Indeed all o! the thirt' e(amples o! $ in the &" T" occur with con0unctions (paratactic or h'potactic) or other particles e(cept those in Lu" --9BN -B9;N Ro" B94/" C!" U $ ! (Jindeed it is sinK) in Hermas )is. i -"B" The particles with which $# is !ound in the &" T" are )9 $# (Lu" /79/-)N $# (<t" >9/L)N Q9 $# (Ac" B94L)N #. $# (Eph" 49/)N #< + $# (<t" =9-)N $# (Ac" ->9/>)N $# (.o" 79/)N $# (- Cor" =94)N S# $# (- Cor" 79B)N #-$# (Ro" D9/L)" C!" 9 $# in Lu" --9BN -B9;" I9 is compounded o! $ and %ut it will %e treated under con0unctions thou$h it is sometimes not much more than an intensive particle" C!" $* H !# (<t" />9/4)" #b$ V" It has li5ewise an uncertain et'molo$'" - It appears in the Attic poets as (c!" , ) and is seen in composition with J, J@, #J, /J"/ In /J we
3 Parti5ellehre, I, ". 2#3. 1 ;C-mlein, +riech" Parti5eln, 1831, ". 45. '7?ner '9;NER, E., +rundriG ,u Forlesun$en 2%er die $riech" S'nta( (1882). # Gr-ndr., ". 84. 0/. al&o Na.el&?a(+, Comm" de particulae $ usu Hom" 1820, ". 5. 2 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #48. 1 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 457. # I?.A ErellBitz, Et" :Rrter%uch, ". 72.

pro%a%l' have4 W and " It was ori$inall' temporal in idea and $oes %ac5 to the Indo3 +ermanic period" .annaris7 thin5s that and are one and the same word (c!" and ) and holds that the di!!erence is due to the transliteration !rom the old to the new alpha%et when alone a distinction was made %etween # and #X 68" Thus the spellin$ was con!ined to the intensive particle while was the !orm !or the con0unction" It is certain that in Homer there is con!usion %etween and %e!ore vowels"; In Homer also ma' %e$in a sentence %ut in the &" T" as elsewhere all the e(amples are postpositive (%ut not enclitic)" 6lass= does not treat it as an intensive particle %ut as a consecutive particle" It is hard to !ollow 6lassK theor' o! the particles" Li5e the other intensive particles it has no En$lish or +erman e8uivalent and is a hard word to translate" It is climacteric and indicates that the point is now at last clear and ma' %e assumed as true"> C!" Latin *am nunc -;/ (- .o" 794)N / (Ro" -9-L)" The similarit' in sense %etween and one usa$e o! ma' %e seen in Ac" =94 !Y!# 68 where :" H" put in the mar$in" C!" !N in Lu" -9>=" V is not $enuine in / Cor" -/9-" There are le!t onl' si( &" T" illustrations countin$ @ in He%" /9-= 3 $* @ )$$ T9#" In <t" -49/4 Z' 4 #C it occurs in a relative sentence Jwho is 0ust the man who"KB The other e(amples are all with the hortator' su%0unctive (Lu" /9-;N Ac" -;94=) or the imperative (Ac" -49/N - Cor" =9/L) in accord with the classical idiom" There is a note o! ur$enc' in )!# (Ac" -49/) and [9!# (- Cor" =9/L)" The passa$e with # in .o" ;97 has disappeared !rom the critical te(t" #c$ \O , and " Somewhat a5in to the positive note in is the use o! W which is read %' man' <SS" in He%" =9-7" The et'molo$' o! this adver% is a$ain 8uite uncertain thou$h it is possi%le that it ma' have the same root as / 6W#, ]8"- C!" W 6^8" In /# (.o" -/974) and / (Ro" =9-=) we have the comparative or dis0unctive /" In Homer it was o!ten used in connection with other particles"/ :e ma' pass !or the present" I! W were $enuine in He%rews the usa$e would %e in strict accord with classic construction !or a stron$ asseveration" 6ut certainl' #O is the true te(t" This 8ueer idiom appears a !ew times in the LXX (E,e5" 449/>N 479BN 4B9-D etc")" It occurs also in the pap'ri and the inscriptions4 a!ter iiiM6"C" C!" #O P" C('" /;; (A"@" 7B)" So that it is mere itacism %etween W and #O" The @oric has #O !or W where <oulton7 holds a$ainst
2 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #43. 5 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 510. 4 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #43. 3 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #72 /. 7 6lotz ad <e1ar., II, ". 29#. 8 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #75. 1 0/. ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 451A 6.8G., II, ". 155. # Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #58. 2 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 53. Mo-lton

ort; that the distinction is strictl' ortho$raphical" See !urther chapter FI Crtho$raph' and Phonetics II (c)" So then #O has to %e admitted in the as an asseverative particle" It is thus another !orm o! W " .annaris= $ives a special section to the )asseverative particles* and 9" :e do not have 9 in the &" T" and onl' once in - Cor" -;94- 5 , )! 4 4 L# "D!_ ` is a peculiarit' o! the Attic dialect and is used in solemn asseverations (oaths etc") and means Jtrul' K J'es"K It is pro%a%l' the same word as the a!!irmative adver% which occurs over thirt' times in the &" T" ` ma' %e simpl' J'es K as in <t" -49;-" It ma' introduce a clause as J'eaK or Jveril' K as in <t" --9D" It is used in respect!ul address `, "# (.o" --9/>)" It ma' %e used as a su%stantive (li5e an' adver%) with the article (/ Cor" -9->) or without the article (<t" ;94>) where it is repeated" It occurs with ) in Rev" -9>" It stands in contrast with 3 in <t" ;94> and / Cor" -9->" There was an old !orm JD (c!" 3JD)" 6ut we do not 5now the et'molo$' thou$h 6ru$mann> compares it with the Latin n and nae and possi%l' also with the old Indo3+ermanic n-n (JsoSsoK)" #d$ a" :e 5now a little more a%out which is postpositive %ut not enclitic" It is onl' another !orm o! which occurs in the &" T" onl' in He%" =9-7" The @oric and
MO>L,ON, %. '., A Grammar o/ N. ,. Gree). Gol. I, Erole.omena (1903). 2d ed. (1908). ***, 0+ara(teri&ti(& o/ N. ,. Gree) (,+e EH"o&itor, 1905). ***, Einleitun$ in die Sprache des &" T" (1911). ***, Grammati(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&itor, 1901, "". #71$#8#A 1902, "". 105$1#1, 5#2$529. ,+e 0la&&i(al Re1ieB, 1901, "". 21$27, 525$551A 1905, "". 103$ 11#, 141$144). ***, Introd-(tion to N. ,. Gree) (1894). #d ed. (1905). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ 0+ri&t ('a&tin.&I One81ol. <. ;., 1909). ***, N. ,. Gree) in t+e Li.+t o/ Modern <i&(o1er! (0am?r. ;i?l. E&&a!&, 1909, "". 531$ 404). ***, ,+e (ien(e o/ Lan.-a.e (1902). MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). MO>L,ON and MILLIGAN, LeHi(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&., 1908*). ***, ,+e Go(a?-lar! o/ t+e N. ,. Ill-&trated /rom t+e Ea"!ri and ot+er Non8Literar! o-r(e&. Eart I (1915), II, III. 5 I?., ". 53. 'ort 'OR,, =. %. A., Note& on Ort+o.ra"+! ("". 151$172, 1ol. II o/ t+e N. ,. in t+e Ori.inal Gree), 188#). 4 A""., ". 141. 3 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 510. 7 Grie(+. Gr., ". 455.

Les%ian use 9X and the Thessalian 9;" So then it seems pro%a%leB that 9 (9 used with words o! swearin$ a!ter a ne$ative) and are one and the same word" Indeed in Homer- all three !orms occur in the same sense" That ori$inal sense is a!!irmative meanin$ Jsurel' K Jindeed K Jin truth"K It is overre!inement to !ind in 68 the su%0ective con!irmation and in the o%0ective attestation"/ It is pro%a%le that in the chan$e !rom the old alpha%et to the new the transcri%ers adopted the two wa's o! spellin$ common in Attic and Ionic ( and ) with a notion that was merel' emphatic with sin$le words while was correlative (!orwards or %ac5wards) or antithetical"4 Tuestions o! metre ma' also have entered into the matter" 6ut there is no dou%t at all that in itsel! does not mean or impl' antithesis" The ori$inal use was simpl' emphatic con!irmation o! sin$le words usuall' the wei$htiest word in the sentence" This use was $raduall' le!t more and more to and other particles %ut it is not anacoluthic as :iner7 holds !or to occur without the presence o! or )9" The older lan$ua$e is naturall' richer; in this ori$inal idiom with %ut it survives in the &" T" and is not to %e re$arded as unclassical or uncouth" #or an e(ample in the pap'ri see 6" A" 7/4 (iiMA"@") H + 9" The old idiom survived %est in the vernacular and in poetr' while the literar' prose was more care!ul to use the antithetical or resumptive " This solitarium as the %oo5s call it ma' have a concessive or restrictive !orce"= C!" #< + $* b DA#' (/ Cor" --97) where there is no thou$ht o! or )9" It is seen also rather o!ten in the Acts" C!" -9-B c' + ! D (49-4) Z L#C' + #?# (c!" L#C' in ne(t verse which is copulative not adversative) (49/-) Z #C 3H + [! (49//) a@!' + #O# (->9-/) + [ 3& !#@! (/-94D) $1 ' #< (/49-B) b + T? (c!" also /494-) (/>9/-) 0# (/B9//) # + $* ' R!#' "' and the instances o! R + li5e Acts -9=N /97-N ;97-N B9/; where no contrast is intended" See #< + in He%" >9--N , + #3 in Ro" -L9-N 5 :! + #< $? in --9-4" C!" / Cor" -/9-/N - Th" /9-B $1 " C!" also the sin$le instance o! #- as one word (Lu" --9/B) which is o%viousl' without contrast" The same thin$ is true o! #-$# (Ro" D9/LN -L9-BN Ph" 49B) however it is printed" The main word is sharpened to a !ine point and there is a hint o! contrast in Ph" 49B" Indeed most o! the instances o! in the &" T" are resumptive not correlative or antithetical"- There remain the instances where implies contrast" It is 0ust a step in advance o! the ori$inal idiom" C!" <t" B9/- #YA & )##C where there is nothin$ to correspond to &" The 0# is involved in what precedes" So
8 I?. 1 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #41. # 6.8G., II, ". 124. 2 %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 509. 5 :.8,+., ". 474. 4 %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 509. 3 'art-n., Parti5ellehre, II, ". 505. 1 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #37. %ann. ('i&t. G). Gr., ". 510) .i1e& a 1er! lar.e li&t o/ ill-&tration& o/ t+e ori.inal -&e o/ /rom an(. G).

with & and #; in Ro" -9-= and &; in / Cor" B9;" The does not answer to the &"/ .ust so we have H + & A$ in Ac" -9- without a #"# thou$h the clear implication is that the Acts is the second %oo5" In - Cor" --9-B & + $9 the contrast is implied4 in verses /L !!" %ut in Ro" -9B & + #3D!& there is no hint o! other $rounds o! than5s$ivin$" This instance ma' %e a chan$e o! thou$ht on PaulKs part (anacoluthon) or it ma' %e the ori$inal use o! meanin$ J!irst o! all in truth"K C!" & in Ro" 49/" In Ro" >9-/ b + A' there is no contrast stated %ut in verse -7 it is $iven %' 'et without " In Col" /9/4 d9 ! A$ + 0D !' the antithesis is reall' stated in 3 G, _ without an adversative particle" In - Cor" ;94 the stands alone while )? and ? are contrasted %' " In He%" -/9D there is contrast %etween the clause and the ne(t which has no particle (onl' N P)" In Ac" /=97 = is !ollowed %' - %' wa' o! contrast and %' * - in ->94L" C!" ; in - Th" /9-B ; in Ac" />9/- where there is practicall' no contrast" 6ut see Z ; e# in Lu" B9; !!" Z ; in <5" 797 !!" :e have ;0# in .o" --9=N .as" 49->N - Cor" -/9/B" These are all e!!orts to e(press antithesis" :e see this also in ; in Lu" //9// and in ;)9 in Ac" 79-=N Ro" -79/LN - Cor" -79->" In <5" D9-/ !" )9 is independent o! the " 6ut it is the ; construction that is the most !re8uent in the &" T" as in the Attic +ree5" There are two and a hal! pa$es o! e(amples o! in its various uses in the &" T" $iven in <oulton and +edenKs !oncordance %ut even so the particle has made a distinct retreat since the Attic period"7 It is wholl' a%sent !rom / Peter - / and 4 .ohn / Thessalonians - Timoth' Titus (critical te(t) and Revelation" It occurs thrice in .ude onl' once in Eph" (79--) Col" (/9/4) - Th" (/9-B) .as" (49->)" It is most !re8uent in <atthew Acts Romans - Corinthians and He%rews" Pale'- thin5s that and ma' contain the roots o! one () and two (")" 6ut certainl' the correlative antithesis is not necessar' to either o! them thou$h with there is the notion o! addition" C!" in this connection ; (<5" 797N Lu" B9;) and A# (.o" --9=)" There are var'in$ de$rees o! contrast where and occur to$ether" There ma' %e no emphasis on the and ver' little on the which is not essentiall' adversative" The ma' preserve almost its ori$inal idiom while has sli$ht contrast" So Lu" --97B 9@' !# !@#@#C# C' 0$' & , : 3 + )# 3N' L#C' + <#C#" The whole sentence is 8uoted to show that it is a$reement (correspondence) not opposition that is here accented" In verse 7> we have %ut not which is hardl' !elt in 7B" See also Ac" -494= !"N Ph" 49-N He%" >9B" In particular we note this sli$ht contrast when a whole is distri%uted into its parts as in <t" /;9-7 !!"N - Cor" D9/;" C!" also Ac" -B9-7 !" 6ut the distri%ution ma' amount to sharp division as in - Cor" -9-/ f$1 #< "@, f$1 + g?, f$1 + P, f$1 + h!-" It is thus the conte(t that decides how pointed is the contrast" It is not
# 0/. :.8,+., ". 473. 2 ;-t ;la&& (Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #37) ta)e& it to ?e J/rom t+e 1er! o-t&etI and &o t+e ori.inal -&e o/ . Mo-lton MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). 5 I?., ". #33. 1 ,+e G). Earti(le&, ". 25.

the words and that inherentl' mean opposition" Indeed the contrast ma' %e indicated %' alone as in <t" ;9// /B 4/ 47 4D 77N /;97=N Ac" -/9DN He%" /9BN 79-4N =9-/"/ :e see a $ood illustration o! clear antithesis in .ohnKs words a%out his %aptism and that o! Christ in <t" 49-- $1 ;b " See !urther /L9/4N //9BN /49/BN /;944 !!# * + AT #[& 3- * + [ #3"" The e(amples are numerous" See R ;R (Ph" -9-= !!")N i' ;i' (.ude //)N +' ;+' (Ph" -9-;)N #<' ;#<' (He%" D9= !")N R ; (<t" -=9-7)N ; (- Cor" -;94D)N - ;- (He%" -L944)N & ;0# (He%" >9/)N #< + ;#< (Ac" -D94B !")N #< ;- (He%" --9-; !") etc" These e(amples !airl' e(hi%it the &" T" usa$e o! " It is o!ten a matter o! oneKs mood how much emphasis to put on and as in <t" D94> and <5" -794B" In there is alwa's stron$ contrast" As e(amples o! ;)9 in sharp contrast see Ro" -79/LN Cor" -79->" So also ; (Lu" //9//)" #e$ " It is pro%a%l' a shortened !orm o! # (c!" per!ect) or more e(actl'"4 It is %oth postpositive and enclitic and is usuall' in the &" T" printed as a part o! the word with which it occurs" 6ut in Homer this is not true while !ollows onl' once"There is no dou%t a%out the et'molo$' o! this particle"/ Some4 even connect it directl' with or " C!" # (critical te(t in Ac" -D94D)" 6ut this idea does not con!lict with the other !or is the locative o! " It is an Indo3+ermanic root and the ori$inal notion o! occurs in #J, #J' nu-per, per-manere, per-tinax, sem-per etc" It means then to do a thin$ to the limit (%e'ond) thorou$hl'" There is a note o! ur$enc' in " It is intensive as $ %ut pro%a%l' tends to %e more extensive also"7 Sometimes the emphasis in is in spite o! opposition; as in # which occurs si( times in the &" T" (Ph" 497N He%" ;9BN >9;N -/9->N / Pet" -9-/) and alwa's with participles as # j @RA' (He%" ;9B)" The Te(tus Receptus has S# in <5" -;9= %ut :" H" read onl' S %ut A# appears twice as an in!erential con0unction (- Cor" B9-4N -L9-7)" See !# C" P" --/; = (iiiMA"@")" The other e(amples are all with con0unctions as 9# (He%" 49-7N =94)N #.# (a hal!3do,en times all in Paul as Ro" B9DN - Cor" -;9-;)N ## (some <SS" in Ro" 494L %ut the %est <SS" as :" H" $ive have #.#)N ## (onl' Lu" -9-)N /# (onl' the critical te(t in .o" -/974)N 9# (some -> times all in Paul save He%" 79/) ?!# (He%" ;97 and a varia lectio in / Cor" 49-B) k!# (some 4= times chie!l' in <atthew Lu5e and Paul as <t" =9/) 2!## (once onl' - Cor" -;9B)" #+$ % does not occur alone in the &" T" %ut onl' in composition" It is enclitic as in /, , %ut it comes !irst in $- and @" The et'molo$' is not
# ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #33. 2 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 454. 1 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #47. # 'art-n., Earti)elle+re, I, ". 2#7. 2 ;C-mlein, Earti)eln, ". 198. 5 6.8G., II, ". 138. 4 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #47.

certain" 6ru$mann= ta5es it to %e a !i(ed !orm o! the ethical dative ! 68" Cthers> ta5e it as the locative o! the demonstrative A" 12hner3+erthB consider it the locative o! the inde!inite " There seems no wa' o! tellin$ !or certain" 6ut it seems to have the notion o! restriction and in HomerD is o!ten com%ined with adversative particles" In the &" T" we !ind / once (Ro" =9-=) twice (Ac" -79->N He%" 794) $# once (.o" 79/) ei$ht times !ive in .ohnKs +ospel as .o" 79/> and once in Paul (/ Tim" /9-D) $- twice (- Th" 79BN He%" -/9-) @ three times (Lu" /L9/;N - Cor" D9/=N He%" -49-4)" l' is an adversative particle that occurs three times in the &" T" (.o" -/97/ here with N - Cor" -79>N +al" 49-;) twice with a participle" III. Negative Particles (!# ). The use o! the ne$ative particles has %een discussed alread' in various parts o! the $rammar in an incidental wa' in connection with the modes ver%al nouns and dependent clauses" 6ut it is necessar' at this point to treat the su%0ect as a whole" It is not the lo$ical ne$ative that one has here to deal with" <an' words are ne$ative in idea which are positive in !orm" Thus )empt'* is ne$ative )cold* is ne$ative )death* is ne$ative" Aristotle uses !#A' !or this ne$ative conception" It is in realit' an a%lative idea as !# implies" 6ut the $rammarian is concerned simpl' with those words that are used to ma5e positive words (or clauses) ne$ative" This is the $rammatical ne$ative" There are indeed in +ree5 as in En$lish ne$ative post3!i(es"- 6ut there is a common ne$ative +ree5 pre!i( )68 called alpha privative Sans5rit a(n) Latin in +othic un En$lish un" In Sans5rit this pre!i( does not occur with ver%s and is rare with su%stantives" It is there !ound chie!l' with ad0ectives and participles"/ In +ree5 it occurs with ver%s %ut chie!l' denominative ver%s li5e )9F"4 The use o! )m ()m %e!ore vowels) is in the +ree5 still more common with ad0ectives and ver%als" See the chapter on #ormation o! :ords !or details" C!" )A', ), )#', )!"#', )!"#', !$', )## (Ro" -9/BU 4L)" -" THE C6.ECTIFE n3 A&@ ITS CC<PCA&@S"

3 Grie(+. Gr., "". 50#, 4#4. 7 0/. Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #4#. 8 II, ". 159. 9 'om. Gr., ". #4#. 1 Anon., Note& on Ne.ati1e Eo&t/iHe& in G). and Lat., 1885, ". 3. # ,+om"&on, !nt. o/ Atti( G)., ". 557. 2 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 4#9.

#a$ Origin. This is un5nown" H2%schmann7 sees a connection with the Latin haud as do other scholars"; #owler= ta5es it as an ori$inal intensive particle li5e pas in the #rench ne pas and mD (Indo3+er" -ghi) in 3JD" The Oend ava is also noted and the Latin au #au%+ero$"> 6ut there is no dou%t that 3 in the +ree5 too5 the place o! the Sans5rit n Latin n- (ne%&ue ne%scioN the relation o! n n-quidem, n-quam to this n is not 5nown) +othic ni" The use o! the +ree5 3 corresponds to the Sans5rit n" #b$ History. As !ar %ac5 as +ree5 $oes we !ind 3 %ut 3 did not hold its own with in the pro$ress o! the lan$ua$e" :ithin the past centur' 3 has %ecome o%solete in modern +ree5 outside o! a !ew prover%s save in the Laconian and the Pontic dialects"The Pontic dialect uses !rom Cld Ionic 3" 6ut modern +ree5 has 3 and 7# (Thum% "andb. p" /LL)" In the 6Qotian dialect it ma' %e noted 3 never did $ain a place" :e have seen 3 used as an adver% an idiom that $oes %ac5 to Homer"/ .annaris4 e(plains that the vernacular came to use 3 and !or emphasis and then on a par with 3 and " Then 3 dropped 3 and lost leavin$ and !or the modern +ree5" At an' rate this is the outcome" V is the ne$ative o! the ind" in modern +ree5 e(cept a!ter 9 and !inal clauses when we !ind * (Thum% "andb. p" /LL)" And is the re$ular ne$ative in the protasis o! conditional sentences %oth with ind" and su%0"7 The distinction %etween 3 and did %ecome more or less %lurred in the course o! time %ut in the &" T" as in the $enerall' the old +ree5 idiom is ver' well preserved in the main" 6uttmann; even thin5s that the &" T" idiom here con!orms more e(actl' to the old literar' st'le than in an' other point" V ma' represent (Rendel Harris ,xp. #e%" -D-7 p" -=4)"
'7?&(+mann '9; 0'MANN, Z-r 6a&-&le+re (1874). 5 0/. @as indo$er. Go)al8 !&tem, ". 191. 4 0/. Gilder&l., Am. %o-r. o/ E+ilol., KGIII, "". 5, 1#2 /.A 'orton8 mit+, i?., "". 52 //.A ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 4#8. =oBler =O:LER, ,+e Ne.ati1e& o/ t+e Indo8E-ro"ean Lan.-a.e& (1893). 3 ,+e Ne.ati1e& o/ t+e Indo8E-ro". Lan.., 1893. 0/. <el?r7(), Gr-ndr., IG, ". 419. 7 ;-t <rae.er ('i&t. !nt., ". 122) &a!& t+at t+i& (onne(tion Bit+ t+e Lat. haud (annot ?e &+oBn. 1 =arrar, G). !nt., ". 18#A %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 5#4. # Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #49. 2 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 5#3. 5 ,+-m?, 'and?., ". 195 /.A %e??, in G. and <., ". 229. ;-ttmann ;>,,MANN, A., +rammati5 d" neut" Sprach$e%rauchs (1849). 4 Gr. o/ t+e N. ,. G)., ,+a!erI& ,ran&l., ". 255. 'arri& 'ARRI , %. REN<EL, ide8Li.+t& on N. ,. Re&ear(+ (1908).

#c$ Meaning. n3 denies the realit' o! an alle$ed !act" It is the clear3cut point3%lan5 ne$ative o%0ective !inal"= .annaris> compares 3 to : and to = while 6lassB compares 3 to the indicative mode and to the other modes" 6ut these analo$ies are not wholl' true" Sometimes indeed 3 coalesces with the word as in 7 Pnot merel' JI do not sa' K %ut JI den'"K So 3 9 (Ac" -=9>)PJI !or%id"K C!" 3 (<5" D94L)N 3 0D (<t" -49-/)N 3 )$ (/ Cor" /9--)" See also H 3 A in Ro" D9/; (LXX) where 3 has the e!!ect o! an ad0ective or a pre!i(" @el%r2c5D thin5s that this use o! 3 with ver%s li5e the Latin ne%scio was the ori$inal one in +ree5" In the LXX 3 translates . " #d$ Uses. Here it will %e su!!icient to ma5e a %rie! summar' since the separate uses (pp" D-> !" D/D !" etc") are discussed in detail in the proper places" The point here is to show how all the varied uses o! 3 are in harmon' with the true meanin$ o! the particle" (i) The Indicative. :e meet 3 with the indicative in %oth independent and dependent clauses" #$ -ndependent Sentences" Here the ne$ative 3 is universal with the indicative in declarative sentences" The !orce o! 3 (3 %e!ore vowels 3D %e!ore aspirate) is sometimes ver' power!ul li5e the heav' thud o! a %low" C!" 3 ?#, 3 !#, 3 !@$9$##, 3 ##T9##, 3 #!Y!# (<t" /;97/ !")" The !orce o! all these ne$atives is $athered up in the one 3 in verse 77" In verse 7; 3 and 3 are %alanced over a$ainst each other" See 3 0#!# in <t" >9/;" C!" 3 T in .o" -9--" In <t" /-9/D see the contrast %etween $?, "# and 3 )#" &ote the pro$ressive %luntness o! the 6aptistKs denials till 7 comes out !lat at the last (.o" -9/!")" In the &" T" 3 alone occurs with the !uture indicative used as a prohi%ition thou$h the classic idiom sometimes had " C!" 3 #"!#' (<t" ;9/-)N 3 0!#!# 2' R L (=9;) etc" Still 6lass- 8uotes !!## in Clem" "om. III =D" The volitive su%0ective nature o! this construction well suits %ut 3 is more emphatic and suits the indicative" In <t" -=9// 3 4 0! ! - we have 3 in the

Exp. Exp., ,+e EH"o&itor (London). 3 0/. ,+o-1emin, Les &?$ations dans le &" T" Revue de Philol", 1895, ". ##9. 7 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 5#7. 8 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #42. <el?r7() <EL;R906, ;., A%lativ Localis Instrumentalis (1837). ***, +rundriG der ver$l" +ramm" d" indo$" Sprachen" S'nta(" 6de" III$G (1892, 1897, 1900). ***, Introd-(tion to t+e t-d! o/ Lan.-a.e (188#). Einleitun$ in das Sprachstudium" 7" Au!l" (-DL7)" ;" Au!l" (1912). ***, S'nta5tische #orschun$en" ; 6de" (1871$1888). 9 !nt. =or&(+., IG, ". 157. 1 Gr. N. ,. Gr., ". #45.

prohi%itive sense" :hen 3 occurs alonePJno K as at the end o! a clause it is written 7 as in 7, # (<t" -49/D)N H n7 7 (/ Cor" -9->)" 6ut in interro$ative (independent) sentences 3 alwa's e(pects the answer J'es"K The +ree5 here draws a distinction %etween 3 and that is rather di!!icult to reproduce in En$lish" The use o! a ne$ative in the 8uestion seems naturall' to e(pect the answer J'es K since the ne$ative is challen$ed %' the 8uestion" This applies to 3" :e ma' leave till we come to it" n3 in 8uestions corresponds to the Latin nonne" C!" <t" >9// 3 o !o pA #"!# _ where 3 is the ne$ative o! the whole lon$ 8uestion and is not repeated with the other ver%s" See !urther <t" -49;;N Lu" ->9->N - Cor" -79/4" In - Cor" D9- we have 3 !our times (once 3D)" The !orm 3D is a %it sharper in tone" C!" <t" -49/>N Lu" -/9=" In Lu" =94D we have with one 8uestion " @H' @H b$#C( and 3D with the other (side %' side) 3D )A# #<' TA@ #!-( There is a tone o! impatient indi$nation in the use o! 3 in Ac" -49-L 3 "!q ! *' bN' - @@ *' #3#'( In Ac" /-94B 3 !N #O b <$"'( the addition o! means Jas I supposed %ut as I now see denied"K- In <5" -79=L note the measured use o! 3 and 3 in %oth 8uestion 3 )q 3( and the description o! ChristKs silence 3 )# 3" In Lu" -B9> 3 4 !q; @#C 5 3C'( we come near havin$ 3 in a 8uestion with the present indicative as well as with the aorist su%0unctive" In a 8uestion li5e 4 3 0D#( (- Cor" D97) 3 is the ne$ative o! the ver% while is the ne$ative o! the sentence" C!" Ro" -L9-B -D" In - Cor" D9B we have in one part o! the 8uestion and 3 in the other 4 * - &, r b A' - 3 $#( In <t" //9-> (Lu" /L9//N <5" -/9-7) we have r 7( as the alternative 8uestion and <ar5 adds r " 6a%%itt/ holds that )3 is used in 8uestions o! !act while in other 8uestions (e"$" 8uestions o! possi%ilit') is used"* I dou%t the correctness o! this interpretation" In declarative sentences the position o! 3 is to %e noted when !or emphasis or contrast it comes !irst" C!" 3 and )9 in Ro" D9B" So 3 $9;)5 S in >9-;" In >9-B !" note 7> 3 side %' side" C!" also position o! 3 in Ac" -9;N /9-;N Ro" --9-B (3 !"; )9)" So )5 3 $? in - Cor" =9-/" #$ Subordinate !lauses" In principle the use o! 3 is the same as in independent sentences" 6ut there are some special adaptations which have alread' %een discussed and need onl' %rie! mention here" In relative clauses with the indicative 3 is almost the onl' ne$ative used in the &" T" the e(amples o! %ein$ ver' !ew as will %e seen directl'" This is true %oth with de!inite relative clauses where it is o%viousl' natural as in / Cor" B9-L =#' 3 A;#[!# (c!" Ro" -L9-7N .as" 79-7) and in inde!inite relative clauses where is possi%le %ut %' no means necessar' as in <t" -L94B Z' 3 T9# (c!" Lu" D9;LN -7944 etc")" The use o! 3 in the relative clause which is preceded %' a ne$ative is not an encroachment4 on " C!" 3 4 )#G s# ' Z' 3 @!# (<t" /79/)" It is a common enou$h idiom in the old +ree5 as we see it in -L9/= (Lu" -/9/) 3 ! #@ Z 3 )@!#" C!" Lu" B9-> where the second relative has 3 4 $!G and Ro" -;9-B !or the ne$ative 3 in principal and
1 :.8,+., ". 411. ;a??itt ;A;;I,,, ,+e >&e o/ a in L-e&tion& ('ar1ard t-die& in 0la&&. E+il., 1901). # 'ar1., t-. in 0la&&. E+ilol., 1901, ,+e >&e o/ a in L-e&tion&, ". 207. 2 :.8,+., ". 581.

relative clause" In <5" 79/; note Z' 0D# and Z' 3 0D#" C!" Z and Z 3 (Ro" >9-; -D)" Practicall' the same7 construction is 3 with the relative in a 8uestion as ' ! Z' 3 in Ac" -D94;N c!" He%" -/9>" #or !urther illustration o! 3 with relative clauses see <t" -/9/P<5" /9/7N .o" =9=7N Lu" -79/>N .o" 79//N Ro" -;9/-N +al" 49-LN Rev" D97" In temporal clauses with the indicative 3 comes as a matter o! course"- This is true o! a de!inite note o! time as in Ac" //9-- 2' 3 T# and o! an inde!inite period as in .o" 79/- k :# 7# (c!" also D97 N[ :# 3#')" In comparative clauses with the indicative the ne$ative comes outside in the principal sentence since comparison is usuall' made with a positive note" So 3 9# (/ Cor" 49-4)N 3 1' ]!# (B9;)N 3 #< t!# (Lu" -B9--)N 3D 2' (Ro" ;9-; !")" :e do have 2' 3 ) in - Cor" D9/= (participle) as in / Cor" -L9-7 we have 3 $9, 2' 4 "# where the two ne$atives are in $ood contrast" In local clauses li5ewise the use o! 3 is o%vious as in :@ 3 #OD# $ (<t" -49;)N S@ 3 #' (.o" /-9-B" Here the 3 is ver' pointed)N c + 3 0! A' (Ro" 79-;)" In causal sentences 3 is not 8uite universal thou$h the usual ne$ative" C!" <t" /;97; 5 :! 3 !# u " & D! (/9-B) : 3 #<! (He%" =9-4) # 5 3#H' #OD# (- Cor" -79-=) #4 3 O#" See !urther Lu" -947N .o" B9/L 4>N Ro" --9=" In He%" D9-> # 4 A# V # mar$" o! :" H"W <!D"# ma' %e a 8uestion as Theoph'lact ta5es it %ut :" H" do not print it so in the te(t" 6ut it is not a departure !rom ancient +ree5 idiom to have with the ind" in causal sentences as will %e shown" C!" .o" 49-B with - .o" ;9-L" In +inal clauses with the ind" 3 does not occur" The reason !or in clauses o! purpose is o%vious even thou$h the ind" mode %e used (c!" Rev" D97 /L)" It is onl' with clauses o! apprehension that 3 is !ound with the ver% when occurs as the con0unction" C!" / Cor" -/9/L T- ' 3D #E" 6ut this is the su%0" not the ind" C!" here 3D =@' and v 3 ##" C!" also <t" /;9D" In Col" /9B we have T## ' 0!; 3 * h!A" The 3 is in contrast with * * !D#C - A!@ thou$h as a second ne$ative it would properl' %e 3 an'how" 6ut in Rev" D97 we have = 4 )!@!;3;3" This/ does seem unusual and is almost an e(ample o! = 3" &o e(ample o! a clause o! result with a ne$ative occurs in the indicative %ut it would o! course have 3" The use o! 3 in conditional sentences has alread' received ade8uate treatment" See Conditional Sentences ch" on <ode" The details need not %e $one over a$ain here" There is no dou%t o! the !act that #< 3 made encroachments on #< in the later +ree5"6lass/ puts it )in direct contradistinction to the classical lan$ua$e"* Thouvemin4
5 ,+o-1emin, Les &?$ations etc", ". #22 /. 1 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #44. # ;-rton, N. ,. M. and ,., ". 181. 1 %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 5#9. # Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #45. 2 Les &?$ations etc", ". #22.

li5ewise treats this use o! #< 3 as )contrairement X lKusa$e classi8ueSoY on le trouve e(ceptionnellement"* It is onl' the !re8uenc' the normalit' o! #< 3 in the &" T" that is remar5a%le" This is in !ull accord with the development since7 in the modern +ree5 )is re$ularl' used in the protasis o! a conditional sentence ali5e with the indicative and with the su%0unctive mood"* So w + $ Ji! I had not $oneK (Thum% "andb. p" -D;)" See <t" /=97/N Lu" -/9/=N .o" -9/;N 49-/N ;97>N -L94>N / Pet" /97N Ro" B9DN --9/-N - Cor" -=9//N / Cor" -/9--N He%" -/9/; etc" The' are all conditions o! the !irst class (determined as !ul!illed) save one o! the second class (determined as un!ul!illed) in <t" /=9/7" In /=97/ #< 3 and * stand out sharpl'" It is so nearl' the rule with conditions o! the !irst class in the &" T" that it is hardl' necessar' to !ollow out the anal'sis o! :iner; to %rin$ the e(amples into accord with ancient usa$e" It is $ratuitous to ta5e #< 3 as causal in Lu" -/9/= or to ma5e #< 3 #< in - Cor" D9/ a denial o! a positive idea" There are cases o! emphatic denial as #. ' 3 #C (- Cor" -=9//)" C!" also / .o" -L #. ' 0D# 3 #" C!" also #< 3 & and #< & in .o" -L94> !" where the antithesis is 8uite mar5ed" See also the decisive ne$ation in .o" -9/;" 6ut when all is said #< 3 has made distinct inroads on #< in the later +ree5" As to the ne$ative in indirect discourse with the indicative it onl' remains to sa' that the use o! 3 is universal" C!" <t" -=9-/ !@ : 3 #O# !D#" In -=9-- note &' 3 #C# : 3 # #O LC( where each ne$ative has its own !orce" C!" also - Cor" =9D" (ii) The Subjunctive. In Homer 3 was the ne$ative with the !uturistic su%0unctive= as in 3 + . -liad I /=/" This !uturistic use o! the su%0" as we have seen (<odes) lar$el' passed over to the !uture indicative > so that 3 disappears !rom the su%0unctive almost entirel' %oth in principal and su%ordinate clauses" Cne ma' compare
5 %e??, G. and <.I& 'and?., ". 229. ,+-m? ,'>M;, A., @ie #orsch" 2%er die hellen" Spr" in den .ahren 190#$1905 (Ar(+. /. Ea". 2, "". 552$ 572). ***, @ie $riech" Sprache im Oeitalter des Hellenismus (1901). ***, @ie sprach$esch" Stell" des %i%l" +riech" (,+eol. R-nd., 190#). ***, Hand%uch der $riech" <ial. (1909). ***, Hand%uch d" neu$riech" Fol5ssprache" /" Au!l" (1910). ***, Hand%uch des Sans5rits. I, Grammati) (1904). ***, Anters" 2%er d" Sp" Asper im +riech" (1889). :iner :INER, G. ;., @e ver%orum cum praep" compos" in &" T" Asu (1825$1852). ***, +ramm" d" neut" Sprachidioms (-B//)" >" Au!l" von L2nemann (l837). 4 :.8,+., "". 577 //. 3 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". 198.

the !inal disappearance o! 3 %e!ore with participles" In .er" =9B 6 reads ^' 3

!G where .ATZ have !!#" It is to %e remem%ered also as alread' noted that in the modern +ree5 occurs in the protasis with su%0unctive as well as with the indicative as w + !#"q' (Thum% "andbook p" -D;)" This is partl' due no dou%t to the o%scuration o! the 3 in %ut at %ottom it is the !uturistic use o! the su%0" :e have alread' noted the use o! 4 3D in / Cor" -/9/L with #E a!ter T- where the 3 is 5ept with the su%0" (classic idiom) to distin$uish it !rom the con0unctional " It is also a case o! the !uturistic su%0" not volitive as in !inal clauses with = or :'" In <t" /;9D the mar$in o! :" H" has # 3 )!q without a ver% o! !earin$ thou$h the notion is there" The te(t has # 3 " .annaris- %oldl' cuts the +ordian 5not %' den'in$ that in 3 is a true ne$ative" He ma5es it merel' a shortenin$ o! " I! so all the uses o! 3 with the su%0" would %e e(amples o! 3 with the su%0" Some o! these however are volitive or deli%erative" This view o! .annaris is not 'et accepted amon$ scholars" It is too simple a solution thou$h .annaris ar$ues that 3 does occur as in Soph" ,l. B-> Eur" "ec. 7L- and he notes that the ne$ation is continued %' 3 not %' 4 " Per contra it is to %e o%served that the modern +ree5 writes as well as as * 4 #OD# 9#' J%ecause he had no mone'K (Thum% "andb. p" /LL)" 6ut whatever the e(planation we do have 3 with the aorist su%0" in the &" T" :e have had to discuss this point alread' (Tense and <ode) and shall meet it a$ain under @ou%le &e$atives" 6ut in .o" -B9-- 3 4 ( the answer is in accord with 3" (iii) The Optative. In the &" T" there are no instances o! the use o! 3 with the optative" It is onl' in wishes (volitive) that the optative has a ne$ative in the &" T" and that is naturall' "/ 6ut this is 0ust an accident due to the rapid disappearance o! the optative" There is no reason wh' 3 should not %e !ound with the potential optative (!uturistic) or the deli%erative which was alwa's rare" (iv) The Imperative. The most stri5in$ instance is - Pet" 494 s 0! 3D b; A!', )5 b @A', " It is the sharp contrast with )5 that e(plains the use o! 3D" C!" also 3 A in - Pet" /9-B where the participle stands in an imperative atmosphere" C!" also 3 with the in!" in the imperatival sense in - Cor" ;9-L" Elsewhere with the imperative we have 4 A (.o" -49DN Ph" /9-/N .as" -9//)" n3 is used in an imperatival connection with the !ut" ind" (<t" ;9/-) and in 8uestions o! li5e nature (Ac" -49-L)" (v) The Infinitive. It is common to sa' that in the &" T"- 3 does not occur with the in!initive not even in indirect assertion" In Homer and in the classic Attic we do !ind 3
7 ,+om"&on, !nt. o/ Atti( G)., ". 598. 0/. :. G. 'ale, ,+e Anti(i"ator! -?M-n(ti1e in G). and Lat., 0ornell t-., 1894. %annari& %ANNARI , A. N., A 'i&tori(al Gree) Grammar (1897). ***, On t+e ,r-e Meanin. o/ t+e (0la&&. Re1., 1902, "". 92 //.). 1 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 522. # Ro?ert&on, +ort Gr. o/ t+e G). N. ,., ". #00. 1 0/. %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 520.

with the in!" in indirect assertion" This is usuall' e(plained on the $round that the 3 %elon$ed to the ori$inal indicative in the direct and is simpl' preserved in the indirect" < onro ("om. Gr. p" /=/) o%serves that in the old Sans5rit onl' !inite ver%s have the ne$ative particles" This 8uestion received !ull discussion under <ode and Fer%al &ouns" Cnl' a %rie! word is allowed here" The oldest use o! the ne$ative in indirect discourse was in the !orm 7 ! ?!# where 3 !ormall' $oes with ! %ut lo$icall' with ?!#" #rom this use <onro conceives there came 3 with the in!" itsel!" 6ut the situation in the &" T" is not 8uite so simple as 6lass/ ma5es it" In .o" /-9/; 35 3H O D!# the ne$ative does $o with O" 6ut this is hardl' true in <5" >9/7 nor in Ac" /=9/=" 6esides 3 occurs in a num%er o! clauses dependent on the in!" as in He%" >9--N Ro" B9-/N Ac" -L97-N Ro" >9=N -;9/LN He%" -49DN - Cor" -9->N Ac" -D9/>" #or the discussion o! these passa$es see In!initive ch" XX ; (l)" It is proper to sa' that in the &" T" we still have remnants o! the old use o! 3 with the in!" thou$h in $eneral is the ne$ative" In Ro" -;9/L 3D S@ a!ter #3$$#F#! stands in sharp contrast with )* ?'" In / Cor" -49> we have 4 ! LP' H , 3D =@;)5 = where the 3D is clearl' an addendum" 6urton4 e(plains #<' 3+ $! in Ac" -D9/> )as a !i(ed phrase * %ut even so it is in use" 6esides there is 4 $D#C 5 3+ D! in / Tim" /9-7" See also 3 a!ter k!# @#"# in Ro" >9=" The use o! 3 with the in!" a!ter 3 with the principal ver% is common enou$h" C!" <5" >9-/N Lu" /L97LN .o" 49/>N ;94LN Ac" /=9/= etc" 6urton7 notes that in the &" T" 3 A occurs alwa's (c!" .o" --9;/N Ac" /-9-4N /=9/DN />9-LN Ro" 79-/ -=N -49;N / Cor" B9-LN Ph" -9/DN - Th" /9B) e(cept once 4 A in +al" 79-B" The use o! 3 A occurs %oth in limitin$ clauses and in the sentence viewed as a whole" (vi) The Participle. There is little to add to what was $iven on the su%0ect o! 3 and with the participle under the Fer%al Aspects o! the Participle (see Fer%al &ouns)" + allowa'- thin5s that it was with the participle that 3 was !irst used (as opposed to the Sans5rit ne$ative pre!i() %e!ore the in!initive had 3" At an' rate 3 is well esta%lished in Homer" :e ma' simpl' accent the !act that the encroachment o! on 3 with the participle $ives all the $reater emphasis to the e(amples o! 3 which remain" C!" b 3 j (.o" -L9-/)N 2' 3 (- Cor" D9/=)" There is no trou%le in seein$ the !orce o! 3 wherever we !ind it with the participle in the &" T" (vii) With Nouns. Here we see a !urther advance o! the ne$ative particles over the Sans5rit idiom which con!ined them to the !inite ver%" The +ree5 usuall' emplo's the ne$ative pre!i( with nouns %ut in a !ew instances in the &" T" we have 3" So H 3

A in Ro" D9/; (LXX) 3 A' in - Pet" /9-L (LXX) 5 3 0# in Ro" -L9-D ( .

Monro MONRO, <. ;., 'omeri( Grammar (188#). #d ed. (1891). =ir&t ed. -&ed. # Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #44. ;-rton ;>R,ON, E. <., !ntaH o/ t+e Mood& and ,en&e& o/ t+e N. ,. G). 2d ed. (1909). 2 N. ,. M. and ,., ". 185. 5 I?., ". 182 /. GalloBa! GALLO:AF, :. =., On t+e >&e o/ a Bit+ t+e Earti(i"le in 0la&&i(al Gree) (1897). 1 On t+e >&e o/ a Bit+ t+e Earti(i"le in 0la&&. G)., 1897, ". 3.

since it is common in the %est +ree5 writers" C!" , 3 9@!' in Thuc" - -4>" 7 and , 3 [@! in ; ;L" 4" C!" 3 )D#' in / <acc" 79-4" As Tha'er well sa's 3 in this construction )annuls the idea o! the noun"* The use o! 3 to den' a sin$le word is common as in 3 @! (<t" D9-4)" C!" 3 in <5" D94>" In $eneral !or 3 with e(ceptions see 3 !x (Cor" -9->) 3 (/ Cor" 494)" In / Tim" /9-7 5 3+ D! it is possi%le that D! is in the su%stantival sense" There is o! course nothin$ unusual in the use o! 3 with ad0ectives li5e 3 ! (- Cor" -9/=)" :hat is noteworth' is the litotes so common in the &" T" as in the older +ree5" C!" #5 3 " (Ac" />9-7)N #5 3 *' ,' (Lu" -;9-4)N 3 p$ (Ac" ->97)N 3 )!@ (/-94D)" C!" 3 @ (.o" 4947)N 3 #' (Ac" /L9-/)" n3 P' and P' 3 have received discussion under Ad0ectives and so 0ust a word will su!!ice" n3 P! !9[ (- Cor" -;94D) is Jnot ever' 5ind o! !lesh"K C!" 3 o o (Ac" -L97-)N 3 9#' (<t" -D9--)N 3 9' (- Cor" ;9-L)" 6ut 3 w !? P! !9[ (<t" /79//) means Jno !lesh K li5e the He%rew . " The construction in %oth senses is more common in .ohn than in the S'noptic +ospels" It is perhaps worth while to note the use o! 3 or 3 (Cor" -49/) as an a%stract neuter in the predicate" In $eneral attention should %e called to the distinction made %' the +ree5s %etween ne$ativin$ a word and a sentence" This is one reason wh' with the imper" su%0" and in!" we !ind 3 with sin$le words or phrases where is the normal ne$ative o! the clause" #e$ n3" In $eneral when a positive clause is !ollowed %' a ne$ative we have 3 as in classic +ree5" C!" Ro" >9= (with in!" as in He%" >9--)" See also Col" /9B -D" So Lu" B9-7 !@$ 3 ##!-!"- C!" <t" D9-4" Cnce indeed in a peculiar case we !ind connectin$ two ne$ative clauses Lu" =94> 4 ## 3 4 #" #+$ Red ndant or Pleonastic n3" There is one instance o! 3 in indirect discourse where it is pleonastic accordin$ to the classic idiom (see also the #rench ne)" It is in .o" /9// b )"#' : K!-' 3 0!" Some <SS" have the pleonastic 3 in <5" D94D" #g$ Repetition o! n3" :hen the second is a sin$le ne$ative the !ull !orce o! each is retained" It is seldom that we !ind two e(amples o! 3 in the same clause as in - Cor" -/9-; !" 3 * - 3 0! - !?' JIt is not there!ore not o! the %od'"K There are instances o! 3 !ollowed %' where %oth preserve the !ull !orce Ac" 79/L 3 @9#;4 #C" C!" also 3; in - Cor" D9=" So also b 4 & !" 3 0! - #- (- .o" 49-L)" C!" ;9-/" The e(amples are numerous enou$h when the second 3 is in a dependent clause" So 3+ $9 ! #@ Z 3 )@!# (<t" -L9/=)N &' 3 #C# : 3, _ (-=9--)N 3 ! #C s 3 #$9! h!A' (Ro" -;9-B)N 3 .# :;3 !@! (- Cor" =9D)" In <t" /79/ 3 !ollows 3 " See also Lu" B9->" The uses o! 4 3 and 3 are treated later" 6ut note 7, #;F?!# (<t" -49/D) where 7 stands alone" The solemn repetition o! 3;3 in - Cor" =9-L is rhetorical"
,+a!er ,'AFER, %. '., Gree)8En.li&+ LeHi(on o/ t+e N. ,. (1887). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ t+e N. ,. ('a&tin.&I <. ;., 1900). 1 0/. :. '. . %one&., 0l. Re1., Mar., 1910.

@eut" 4/9/-)" 6ut this is %' no means a He%raism

#h$ "he Intensi!ying #ompo nd Negative. :e have seen how 3 can %e made stron$er %' D (3D as in Lu" -9=L)" 6ru$mann/ considers this an intensive particle and di!!erent !rom the Homeric4 63J8 which is li5e 6', , ', 8" So also 3 was ori$inall' 0ust 3 (Jand not K J%ut notK) and is o!ten so printed in Homer"7 In the sense o! Jnot evenK see <t" =9/D" The !orm 3#' is intensive also ori$inall' Jnot one indeedK; and was sometimes printed 3+ #v' (Ro" 49-L) !or even stron$er emphasis" 6ut 3;' also occurs (.o" -L9/B)" C!" also 3 ' (<t" --9/>)N 3 "q 0 (Lu" -=9/)N 7#;' (Ac" /B9/-)N 3; (/ Pet" -9/-)" The adver%ial !orm 3 occasionall' occurs in Homer" The !orm 3#' (c!" Ac" /=9/=) which !lourished !or a limited period in the has alread' had su!!icient discussion" Farious other compound ne$atives were %uilt up on 3 as 3&' (<t" /9=)N 3 (.o" /L9D)N 3# (<t" >9/4)N 3 (<t" -D9=)" n3- was used so much in 8uestions that it lost its ne$ative !orce (.o" -B94>) unless one writes it 7@_ n7# is o! course onl' 3 and " These compound ne$atives merel' stren$then the previous ne$ative" This emphatic repetition o! the compound ne$ative was once $ood vernacular in %oth En$lish and +erman %ut it $ave wa' in literar' circles %e!ore the in!luence o! the Latin"- It was alwa's $ood +ree5" This discussion does not appl' to su%ordinate clauses (as in .o" B9/L) where each ne$ative has its own !orce" The use o! 3 and 7# %elon$s to the discussion o! con0unctions (c!" 7#;7#;3 in Ac" /79-/ !") %ut the e(amples in the &" T" o! the other compound ne$atives with 3 are numerous" #arrar/ $ives some $ood illustrations o! old En$lish" )&o sonne were he never so old o! 'ears mi$ht not marr' * Ascham Scholemaster" <odern En$lish vernacular re!uses to $ive up the pilin$3up o! ne$atives" )&ot nohow said the landlord thin5in$ that where ne$atives are $ood the more 'ou heard o! them the %etter* (.elix "olt ii -DB)" A$ain9 ):hatever ma' %e said o! the $enius o! the En$lish lan$ua$e 'et no one could have misunderstood the 8uer' o! the London citi,en Has no%od' seen nothin$ o! never a hat not their own[* So li5ewise the
;r-.mann ;R>GMANN, 6., Element& o/ 0om"arati1e Grammar o/ t+e Indo8Germani( Lan.-a.e& (tran&lation ?! :ri.+t, 1894). ***, +riechische +rammati5" 4" Au!l" (1900), t+e ed. @-oted. Fierte vermehrte Au!l" o/ A. ,+-m? (1912). ***, +rundriG der ver$l" +r" d" indo$" Sprachen" /" Au!l" 6de" I, II (1897$1912). ***, 1ur,e ver$leichende +rammati5 der indo$ermanischen Sprachen (1905). # Grie(+. Gr., ". 4#8. 2 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #49. 5 I?. 4 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 4#8. 1 :.8,+., ". 599. =arrar =ARRAR, =. :., Gree) !ntaH (1873). # G). !nt., ". 189.

He%rew uses two ne$atives to stren$then each other (c!" - 1i" -L9/-N Is" ;9D)" A $ood e(ample is <5" ;94 3+ 3 3#'" So 3# ' 7 (--9/)" The commonest 5ind o! e(ample is li5e 3 "!# #C 3 (.o" -;9;)" C!" / Cor" --9B" Another instance o! triple ne$ative is Lu" /49;4 3 W 3# ' 7" The 3 is sometimes ampli!ied4 %' 7#;7# as in <t" -/94/ as well as %' 3;3 as in .o" -9/;" Plato shows !our ne$atives 3# 3 3&' 3# (Phaedo >B d)" The com%inations with 3 ma' also %e noticed as 3+ 3 (Lu" -L9-D)N 3 !# )& 35 3 !# $ (He%" -49;)N 3 3 (Rev" -B9-7)" There is no den'in$ the power o! this accumulation o! ne$atives" C!" the En$lish h'mn
)IKll never no never no never !orsa5e"*

#i$ "he $is% nctive Negative. :e !re8uentl' have 3 )where one thin$ is denied that another ma' %e esta%lished"*7 Here there is sharp antithesis" The simplest !orm is 3 ; as in .as" /9-- or 3;)9 as in <t" -;9--N <5" ;94DN Lu" B9;/N Ac" ;97N - Cor" -;9-LN / Cor" 494 etc" In .o" >9// we have 3D :;)9 as also in Ph" 79->" In Ph" 79-- 3D : occurs alone without )9" In / Cor" >9D we have 3D :;)5 :" In .o" /9/- we have 3 0$Y LC :;)5 : where more naturall' we mi$ht e(pect 0$Y 3D :;)5 :" :iner- ma5es rather overmuch o! the possi%le rhetorical distinctions %etween the var'in$ shades o! emphasis in the di!!erent conte(ts where 3; )9 occur" C!" !urther 3D =;)9 (.o" =94B)N 3D =;)5 = (.o" 49->)" :e usuall' have 3 A;)* (.o" ;9-BN Ro" -94/ etc") %ut sometimes merel' 3 A;)9 (Ac" -D9/=N - .o" ;9=)" Sometimes the ne$ative is not e(pressed %ut is to %e supplied in thou$ht as in <t" --9>UD" Then a$ain we ma' have onl' the ne$ative as in 3 T?! (He%" -49D) leavin$ the contrast to %e supplied in the thou$ht" The contrast ma' even %e e(pressed %' 3 as in <t" D9-4 e#' 3 @! (A LXX)" 6ut we have alread' entered the sphere o! the con0unctions as in the parallel 7#; in .o" 79--" So 4 .o" -L" /" THE SA6.ECTIFE &E+ATIFE a A&@ ITS CC<PCA&@S" #a$ "he History o! a" The Ionic Attic and @oric dialects have the Eleatic has 9 li5e the Sans5rit m" In the old Sans5rit m was used onl' in independent sentences while nd occurred in dependent clauses"/ In the later Sans5rit m crept into the dependent clauses also" It was ori$inall' a prohi%itive particle with the old in*unctive which was in the oldest Sans5rit alwa's ne$ative with m"4 In the later Sans5rit m was e(tended to the other modes" In the +ree5 we see e(tended to wish and then denial"7 :harton; underta5es to show that is primaril' an interro$ative not a prohi%itive or ne$ative particle %ut that is more than dou%t!ul" Alread' in Homer ) had esta%lished itsel! in a lar$e and comple( variet' o! uses to which we have to appeal when we see5
2 0/. :.8,+., ". 599. 5 ,+a!erI& LeH., ". 531. 1 :.8,+., "". 594 //. # ,+om"&on, !nt., ". 558A ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 4#8. 2 ,+om"&on, i?., ". 599. 5 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #30.

to 5now the true nature o! the modal constructions as we come to them"*= The distinction %etween 3 and $oes %ac5 to Indo3+ermanic stoc5 and has survived into modern +ree5" 6ut !rom the ver' start made inroads on 3 so that !inall' occupies much o! the !ield" In the modern +ree5 is used e(clusivel' with participle in prohi%itions and with the su%0" e(cept in conditions and occurs with 9 6* 8 and the ind" +ildersleeve- has shown in a masterl' wa' how made continual encroachments on 3" In the &" T" outside o! #< 3 the advance o! is 8uite distinct as +ildersleeve shows is true even o! Lucian" So as to the pap'ri and the inscriptions" The e(act Attic re!inements %etween 3 and are not reproduced thou$h on the whole the root3distinction remains"/ #b$ Signi!icance o! a" <a( <2ller4 $ives an old Sans5rit phrase m kphalya Jnot !or unsteadiness K which prett' well $ives the root3idea o! " It is an )unstead'* particle a hesitatin$ ne$ative an indirect or su%0ective denial an e!!ort to prevent (prohi%it) what has not 'et happened" It is the ne$ative o! will wish dou%t" I! 3 denies the !act denies the idea" a made one advance on 3" It came to %e used as a con0unction" :e see this use o! m in the late Sans5rit"7 6ut the ori$in o! this con0unctional use o! is undou%tedl' paratactic in clauses o! %oth !ear and purpose"; It is o%viousl' so in indirect 8uestions= where su$$ests Jperhaps"K Camp%ell> ar$ues that )the whole 8uestion o! the +ree5 ne$atives is indeterminate"* This is an e(treme position %ut there is no dou%t a %order3line %etween 3 and which is ver' narrow at times" CneKs mood and tone have much to do with the choice o! 3 or " C!" .o" 79/D cA' ! b h!A'( where 3 would have challen$ed the opposition o! the
4 ,+e G). Indire(t Ne.ati1e, 189#, ". 1. 0/. al&o ;a??itt, ,+e >&e o/ a in L-e&tion&, 'ar1. t-. (GoodBin Gol.). 3 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 170. Gilder&lee1e GIL<ER LEEGE, ;. L., Edition& o/ Eindar and %-&tin Mart!r. ***, Latin Grammar. Man! edition& &in(e 1837. ***, Note& on ta+lI& !ntaH o/ t+e Gree) Ger? (1910). ***, N-mero-& arti(le& in t+e Ameri(an %o-rnal o/ E+ilolo.!. 1 En(roa(+ment& o/ a on n3 in Later G)., Am. %o-r. o/ E+ilol., I, "". 54 //. # Mo-lton, Erol., ". 170. 0/. al&o ;ir)e, @e Particularum et 3 Asu Pol'%iano @ion'siaeo @iodoreo Stra%oniano, 1897, ". 15 /. 2 OH/ord Ina-.-ral Le(t-re, Note 0. 5 ,+om"&on, !nt., ". 558. 4 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 19# /. 3 I?. 7 On o"+. ,ra(+., 90.

nei$h%ours %' ta5in$ sides on the 8uestion whether .esus was the <essiah" The woman does not mean to impl' !latl' that .esus is not the <essiah %' usin$ %ut she raises the 8uestion and throws a cloud o! uncertaint' and curiosit' over it with a womanKs 5een instinct" In a word is 0ust the ne$ative to use when one does not wish to %e too positive" a leaves the 8uestion open !or !urther remar5 or entreat'" n3 closes the door

a%ruptl'"B The LXX uses !or . " #c$ Uses o! a" In $eneral we ma' !ollow the outline o! 3" (i) The Indicative. 6lass- e(pounds the two ne$atives %' sa'in$ that )3 ne$atives the indicative the other moods includin$ the in!initive and participle"* 6ut un!ortunatel' the case is not so simple as that" )In reviewin$ 6lass Thum% ma5es the important addition that in modern +ree5 %elon$s to the indicative and 68 to the su%0unctive"*/ 6ut occurs in the protasis with the su%0" in modern +ree5 as we have seen" 6esides as <oulton4 adds ) has not %een driven awa' !rom the indicative* in the &" T" It ma' %e said at once that with the indicative is as old as historic +ree5"7 The Sans5rit su$$ests that ori$inall' was not used with the indicative" 6ut alread' in
8 0/. Eo&t.ate, 0ontra&t& o/ n3 and a, 0am?rid.e E+ilol. %o-r., 1883. 1 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #42. # Mo-lton, Erol., ". 170. Mo-lton MO>L,ON, %. '., A Grammar o/ N. ,. Gree). Gol. I, Erole.omena (1903). 2d ed. (1908). ***, 0+ara(teri&ti(& o/ N. ,. Gree) (,+e EH"o&itor, 1905). ***, Einleitun$ in die Sprache des &" T" (1911). ***, Grammati(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&itor, 1901, "". #71$#8#A 1902, "". 105$1#1, 5#2$529. ,+e 0la&&i(al Re1ieB, 1901, "". 21$27, 525$551A 1905, "". 103$ 11#, 141$144). ***, Introd-(tion to N. ,. Gree) (1894). #d ed. (1905). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ 0+ri&t ('a&tin.&I One81ol. <. ;., 1909). ***, N. ,. Gree) in t+e Li.+t o/ Modern <i&(o1er! (0am?r. ;i?l. E&&a!&, 1909, "". 531$ 404). ***, ,+e (ien(e o/ Lan.-a.e (1902). MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). MO>L,ON and MILLIGAN, LeHi(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&., 1908*). ***, ,+e Go(a?-lar! o/ t+e N. ,. Ill-&trated /rom t+e Ea"!ri and ot+er Non8Literar! o-r(e&. Eart I (1915), II, III. 2 I?. 5 Gier)e, @e Particulae cum Indicativo Con0unctae Asu Anti8uiore , 1873.

Homer occurs with the indicative in prohi%ition wish oath !ear 8uestion"; )The essence o! these idioms is the com%ination o! the imperative toneSwhich shows itsel! in the particleSwith the mood proper to simple assertion"*= 6ut in the &" T" we no lon$er have with the !ut" ind" in prohi%ition e(cept in case o! 3 " In independent sentences we have with the indicative onl' in 8uestions" )ItKs use in 8uestions is ver' distinct !rom that o! 3 and is maintained in the &" T" +ree5 without real wea5enin$"*> In .o" /-9; , !9$ 0D##( we have a t'pical e(ample with the answer 7" 6lassB e(presses needless o%0ection to this )hesitant 8uestion * as <oulton ri$htl' e(pounds it" C!" .o" 7944N >9/=N and Ro" --9- 4 )?!( with the answer in verse / 3 )?!" See .o" >9;- where &icodemus adroitl' uses in a 8uestion and the sharp retort o! the other mem%ers o! the Sanhedrin 4 !"( The di!!erence %etween 3 and in 8uestions is well shown in .o" 7944 4;" In the use o! the answer in mind is the one e(pected not alwa's the one actuall' received as is illustrated in the 8uestion o! the apostles at the last passover" The' all as5ed $? #<, (TT#( The ver' thou$ht was a%horrent to them JIt surel' is not I"KD 6ut .udas who did not dare use 3 received the a!!irmative answer !N #O' (<t" /=9/;)" a comes to %e used intensivel' much li5e 3D (%oth chie!l' in 8uestions)" In the case o! 4 3 in 8uestions (Ro" -L9-B !"N - Cor" D97 !"N --9//) is the interro$ative particle while 3 is the ne$ative o! the ver%" In dependent clauses occurs with the indicative with the second class conditions (#< ) alwa's e(cept in <t" /=9/7 (<5" -79/-)" C!" #< in .o" -;9// etc" There are also !ive instances o! #< with the ind" in conditions o! the !irst class"- So <5" =9;N Cor" -;9/N / Cor" -49;N +al" -9>N - Tim" =94" C!" in a !ew relative clauses as y 4 #C (Tit" -9--)N z 4 9#! - (/ Pet" -9D)N Z 4 b$#C (- .o" 794 :"H" te(t)" C!" Ac" -;9/D @" There is a certain aloo!ness a%out here that one can !eel as in Plato who )with his sensitiveness to su%tle shades o! meanin$ had in an instrument sin$ularl' adapted !or purposes o! reserve iron' politeness or su$$estion"*/ This use o! with the relative and indicative is clearl' a remnant o! the literar' construction"4 This literar' use o! with the relative was o!ten emplo'ed to characteri,e or descri%e in a su%0ective wa' the relative" There is a solitar' instance o! in a causal sentence : 4 #!#@# (.o" 49-B) which ma' %e contrasted with : 3 #!#@# (- .o" ;9-L)" #or : 4 0D#' see Epictetus IF -L" 47 and S ! 3 IF -L" 4;" Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" ->-) 8uotes ! : 4 #C @io$" o! Cinoanda #ra$m" IF -" D" There is %esides # 4 A# <!D"# in He%" D9-> accordin$ to the te(t o! :" H" thou$h the'
4 Monro, 'om. Gr., "". #30 //. 3 I?., ". #31. 7 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 170 /. Mo-lton .i1e& an intere&tin. note on t+e -&e o/ a& Nlad&O in t+e mod. G). 8 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #45. 9 I?., ". #45. 1 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 171. # ,+om"&on, !nt., ". 551. 2 Mo-lton, Erol., ". 171.

$ive in the mar$in # #;#'( In that case (the mar$inal readin$) # would introduce a 8uestion" See !urther Causal Clauses" In clauses o! desi$n we have = with the ind" as in Rev" D97 = 4 )!@!" The mar$in o! :" H" in -49-> has = ' "" <oulton7 e(plains with the ind" a!ter ver%s o! apprehension as not ori$inall' a con0unction %ut in the sense o! JperhapsK (paratactic not h'potactic)" So Lu" --94; !A# 4 H &';!A' !" C!" also Col" /9BN He%" 49-/N +al" 79--N - Th" 49;" The pap'ri $ive a%undant parallels" <oulton (Prol. p" -D4) cites )$& # )!#C P" Par" 7D (iiM6"C")" The use o! as a con0unction in clauses o! desi$n and !ear with the indicative is parallel to the use o! the ne$ative particle %ut does not !all here !or discussion" (ii) The Subjunctive. A!ter all that has %een said it is o%vious that was destined to %e the ne$ative o! the su%0" !irst o! the volitive and deli%erative uses and !inall' o! the !uturistic also" The !ew remnants o! 3 with the su%0" have alread' %een discussed" #or the rest the normal and universal ne$ative o! the su%0" is " C!" 4 &# (+al" =9D)" In <5" -/9-7 &# r 4 &#( (c!" 7 0ust %e!ore) we see how well suits this deli%erative 8uestion" The use o! with the aor" su%0" in prohi%itions need not %e !urther stressed" :herever the su%0" in a dependent clause has a ne$ative (save a!ter the con0unction a!ter ver%s o! !earin$) the ne$ative is " C!" Z' w 4 0Dq (Lu" B9-B)N . 4 0# (<5" -794B) etc" It is needless to $ive more e(amples" (iii) The Optative. It is onl' the optative o! wish that uses " It was rare to have the ne$ative precative optative in the old Sans5rit"- 6ut alread' in Homer is used with the optative !or a !uture wish" In the &" T" there is no e(ample o! with the optative e(cept in wish" It is seen chie!l' in 4 $ as in Ro" 497 = 4-N +al" =9-7 etc" 6ut note also the curse o! .esus on the !i$3tree in <5" --9-7 # ' H 9$" (iv) The Imperative. It seems that the imperative was ori$inall' used onl' a!!irmativel' and the in0unctive ori$inall' onl' ne$ativel' with m" The oldest Sans5rit does not use m with the imperative"/ In Homer we !ind once 4 0# (-l. IF 7-L) and once 4 "!# (-l. XFIII -47) and once 4 )@!9 (/d. XFI 4L-)" The second person aorist imper" in prohi%itions did not ta5e root and the third person onl' sparin$l' (c!" p" B;=)" See <t" =94 4 $?"4 The ori$inal ne$ative in0unctive appears in the !orm 4 !q' (Latin ne +eceris)" The imperative in +ree5 !ollows the analo$' o! this construction and uses uni!orml'" C!" Lu" --9> A@' 9#D#" #or the di!!erence %etween with the present imperative and with the aorist su%0unctive see Tenses and <odes" C!" <5" -49/- 4 !#"## with Lu" -/9-- 4 #!# and 4 T#C!# with 4 T# (<t" -L9/B 4-)" It is o%viousl' natural !or to %e used with the imperative" #or a delicate turn !rom 3 to see .o" -L94>" 6ut Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" ->-) cites 3# [! !rom an inscr" (6enndor!3&iemann 0eisen in Lykien und 1arien -/D &" -L/)"
Raderma(+er RA<ERMA0'ER, L., &eut" +rammati5" @as +riechisch des &" T" im Ousammenhan$ mit der Fol5ssprache (1911). 5 I?., ". 19#. 1 ,+om"&on, !nt., ". 599. # I?., ". 594 /. 2 I?.

(v) The Infinitive. As we have alread' seen the oldest Sans5rit in!" did not use the ne$ative particles and in Homer7 3 appears to %e the ori$inal ne$ative" 6ut there are a !ew instances o! with the in!" in Homer" The' occur when the in!" is used as an imperative (c!" in the &" T" - Cor" ;9DN / Th" 49-7) !or an oath a wish or an indirect command" It is thus !rom the imperative and other !inite modes that crept into constant use with the in!" It came to %e the normal idiom with the in!" outside o! indirect assertion and in antithetical or emphatic phrases (see under 3)" Thompson- challen$es the statement o! +ildersleeve9 )&ot till the in!initive came to represent the indicative (in indirect statement) could 3 have %een tolerated with the in!initive"* Thompson adds9 )6ut this toleration is esta%lished in Homer"* .ust as we saw ma5e inroads on 3 in other constructions (c!" participles) so it was with the in!" Even in indirect statement came to %e the rule (c!" the Atticist Lucian)" Even in the Attic 3 did not alwa's occur with the in!" in indirect statement"/ The !acts as to the use o! with the in!" in the &" T" have %een alread' $iven (see In!initive and Indirect @iscourse)" C!" !or instance $@! )9!! 4 #O (<5" -/9-B)N )#! 4 #< (Lu" /L9>)" In short 6lass4 sa's that in the &" T" ) is used throu$hout"* That is not 8uite true as we have seen %ut the limitations have alread' %een $iven under 3" C!" Lu" --97/ - + 0# ! )#C 4 #C" C!" /-9-7" The use o! 4 #C a!ter 3 @9# (Ac" 79/L) has alread' %een noticed" Here retains its !ull value" :e need not pursue the matter" C!" - (Ac" /-9-/)N H' H (/ Cor" 49-4)N #<' H (797)N * H (<t" -49;)N o (/ Cor" /9-4)N k!# (<t" B9/B) etc" The redundant or pleonastic use o! with the in!" has li5ewise come up !or consideration under the In!initive" In Lu"

/L9/> some <SS" read )J$#' and thus is redundant a!ter )m %ut .6C@L do not have )m" Then in //947 .6LT re0ect with #< a!ter )!q" In He%" -/9-D :" H" put in the mar$in a!ter q!" 6ut there is no dou%t o! the use o! the redundant in the &" T" C!" Lu" ->9- )#A ! - * !9 4 #C (/79-=) - - 4 $& 3A" See also Lu" 797/N - Pet" 49-LN +al" ;9>" 6ut this pleonastic is %' no means necessar' (c!" Ac" B94=N Ro" -;9//)" It does not usuall' occur with " in the &" T" %ut note Ac" -L97> H E " -! ' - 4 T!( Here is the interro$ative particle e(pectin$ the answer Jno K while is redundant a!ter "#" 6ut in Ac" /79/4 is not pleonastic" :e do not have 4 3 with the in!" in the &" T" Here (a!ter 3) stands alone and is not redundant (c!" Ac" 79/L) or is redundant (/L9/L />) as the case ma' %e" The use o! and 4 3 was not compulsor' in the ancient +ree5"7 (vi) The Participle. :e have seen alread' how the oldest Sans5rit did not use the ne$ative particles with the participle" In Homer we have onl' one instance o! with the participle (/d. IF =B7)"- 6ut $raduall' made its wa' with participles even in Attic +ree5" In the modern +ree5 has driven 3 entirel' !rom the participial use" In
5 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #32. ,+om"&on ,'OME ON, =. E., A !ntaH o/ Atti( Gree). NeB ed. (1907). 1 !nt., ". 515. # %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 520. 2 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #44. 5 0/. GoodBin, M. and ,., "". 2#5 //.A ,+om"&on, !nt., "". 5#4 //.

the &" T" 3 still han$s on as we have seen %ut that is all" The dri!t o! the is !or and a writer li5e Plutarch shows it"/ a is the usual ne$ative o! the participle" The details were $iven in connection with Participles" In the &" T" we need pa' no attention to the Attic re!inements on this point which were not alwa's o%served even there" :e have with the participle in the &" T" as a matter o! course" C!" <t" -/94L b 4 t and b 4 !@9$ (- Tim" ;9-4) * 4 (Lu" 794;) + T9Y (Ac" /L9//) 4 #<?'" In <t" //9-- !" and - Pet" -9B a distinction as was shown seems to %e drawn %etween 3 and with the participle" C!" <t" -B9/;N Lu" -/944N .o" >9-;N Ac" D9DN ->9=N - Th" 79; (c!" +al" 79B) etc" The downri$ht denial o! 3 lin$ered on awhile in the (c!" pap'ri) %ut is puttin$ 3 to rout"4 (vii) Nouns. The ancient +ree57 used with su%stantives as b 4 <A' (Plato Gorg. 7;D %) ad0ectives as R 4 (2nt. v" B/) or adver%s as H 4 ? (Thuc" ii 7;" -)" In the &" T" so !ar as I have noticed with su%stantives and ad0ectives occurs onl' in conte(ts where it is natural" Thus in Lu" -L97 4 , 4 L we have 0ust %e!ore 4 T!9F## T9" In .o" -49D 4 N' A' @ A we have no ver% %ut # is to %e supplied !rom the precedin$ sentence" C!" also Eph" ;9-;N .o" -B97L" So in Ro" -/9-- 4 p is in the midst o! participles used in an imperatival sense" In - Tim" 494 4 9, 4 the construction is #C #O" This in!initival construction is carried on in verse = (in spite o! the parenthesis in verse ;) %' 4 #A@" So as to verse B and Tit" -9>" There is no di!!icult' as to the use o! in Col" 49/ and / Th" 49=" #d$ "he Intensi!ying #ompo nds &ith a" The same stor' in the main that we !ound with 3 is repeated with " There is no D %ut we have in this sense" The e(amples in the &" T" are all in 8uestions (c!" <t" >9-=N .o" -B94;) e(cept one #< (Lu" D9-4)" The position o! ma' $ive it emphasis as in .as" 49- (c!" 3 in <t" -;9--)" The use o! the compound ne$ative as a second (or third) ne$ative is simpl' to stren$then the ne$ative as is true o! 3" C!" <5" --9-7 # ' 9$ (Ac" /;9/7) T&#' 4 #C 3H F (Ro" -49B) # + p### (/ Cor" -49>) 4; etc" 6esides #' there is (Ac" />944) in the sense o! Jnot evenK (Eph" ;94) $# (<t" =9-) # (/ Tim" 49>) (He%" --9>) (<5" D9/;) # (mar$in o! :" H" in He%" D9->" Elsewhere in the &" T" a con0unction) &' (Ac" -L9-7) @ (Ac" />9/D) (Ro" D9--) $# (Cor" =94) ' (/ Th" /94)" a' is onl' a con0unction in the &" T" I! is !ollowed %' 3 as in - .o" 49-L b 4 & !" 3 0! - #- the last ne$ative retains its !orce" So vice versa in Ac" 79/L" In +al" =94 there is a sharp contrast %etween and (%oth neuter a%stracts re!errin$ to a person")" #e$ " :e saw that a!ter a positive statement the ne$ative was carried on %' 3" So also we have as in Eph" 79/= p$F#!# 4 U9## and in Lu" -9/LN / Cor" -/9/- In Ac" -B9D note 4 T- )* 9# 4 !!q' where a positive command comes in %etween the two e(amples o! " In .as" 49-7 per contra 4 @DP!# Y#"#!# * ' )#' the ne$ative seems to cover %oth ver%s connected %' rather than " C!" also Lu" 49-7" :e have instances also
1 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #32. # ,+om"&on, !nt., ". #44. 2 0/. Mo-lton, Erol., ". #21 /. 5 ,+om"&on, !nt., ". 510 /.

o! connectin$ a clause with the con0unction # (<t" -49-;P<5" 79-/)"- In Lu" -79/D = # ' 3- # 4 <!D"';[ we have # with [ and with <!D"'" #+$ $is% nctive Use o! a" The simplest !orm o! this contrast is ; as in Lu" -L9/L 4 D##;D## " Then we have ;)9 as in 4 - )* H {TTP .o" -B97LN 4 T- )* 9# Ac" -B9D" :e have ; in Lu" /49/B" In Lu" -L9/L we reall' have 4 :;+ :" <oulton (Prol. /7L) does not !ind 4 : in the &" T" %ut considers $# in p" - Cor" =94 as tantamount to it" See .o" -49D !or 4 A;)* " So Ph" /9-/" :e need not trench !urther upon the con0unctions" 4" CC<6I&ATIC& C# THE T:C &E+ATIFES" #a$ a4 3" This is ver' simple" It is in the &" T" con!ined to 8uestions where is the interro$ative particle and 3 is the ne$ative o! the ver%" Each ne$ative thus has its own !orce thou$h it is a %it di!!icult to translate the com%ination into $ood En$lish" 6ut it is $ood +ree5" <oulton (Prol. p" -D/) 8uotes PlatoKs Protag. 4-/ A )5 4 3 LT9#'" C!" also 4 3D in .er" /49/7" So Ro" -L9-B 4 3 /@!( :e ma' render it J@id the' !ail to hear[K e(pectin$ the answer J&o"K Paul repeats the same idiom in -L9-D" See !urther - Cor" D97 !"N --9//" - Cor" D9B is not an instance since comes in one part o! the 8uestion and 3 in the other" :e do have ' 3D #E a!ter T- in / Cor" -/9/L %ut here is a con0unction and 3D is the ne$ative o! #E %oth retainin$ their !ull !orce" The construction in - .o" 49-L is not pertinent" #b$ n3 " The use o! 3; in Ac" 79/L is not under discussion nor the redundant a!ter 3 (Ac" /L9/L />) %ut onl' the idiomatic 3 with the aorist su%0" (rarel' present) or occasionall' the !ut" ind" C!" 3 4 9$, 3 4 # in the %o'Ks letter P" C('" --D (iiMiii A"@")" See Is" --9D 3 4 !@! 3+ 4 "" :hatever the ori$in o! this ve(ed pro%lem the ne$ative is stren$thened not destro'ed %' the two ne$atives" :e need not here recount the various theories alread' mentioned"- See Tense and <ode" Let it $o at +ildersleeveKs su$$estion that it was ori$inall' 7> " <oulton (Prol. p" /7D) 8uotes +iles to the e!!ect that this e(planation was o!!ered in the <iddle A$es (the ancients have all our %est ideas) and notes )in one i! not %oth o! the %est <SS" o! Aristophanes it is re$ularl' punctuated 7> "* In <t" -49/D we have 7> #; F?!# where is a con0unction" +ildersleeve notes that 3 is more common in the LXX and the &" T" than in the classic +ree5"/ 6ut <oulton (Prol. pp" -B>U-D/) will not let it $o at that" )In the LXX . is translated 3 or 3 indi!!erentl' within a sin$le verse as in Is" ;9/>"* It seems pro%a%le that the !orce o! 3 has worn down in the LXX and the &" T" In the non3literar' pap'ri )3 is rare and ver' emphatic * <oulton notes" He ur$es also that in spite o! the -LL e(amples in the te(t o! :" H" the idiom in the &" T" is as rare as in the pap'ri when the -4 LXX 8uotations and the ;4 !rom the words o! Christ are removed )a !eelin$ that inspired lan$ua$e was !itl'
1 0/. :.8,+., ". 595. 1 0/. GoodBin, M. and ,., "". 289 //.A ,+om"&on, !nt., "". 521$528. Gile& GILE , E., A +ort Man-al o/ 0om"arati1e E+ilolo.!. #d ed. (1901). ***, ,+e Gree) Lan.-a.e (En(!(. ;ritanni(a, 1910). # %-&tin Mart!r, ". 139.

rendered %' words o! a peculiarl' decisive tone"* 6ut in these e(amples the !orce o! 3 is still stron$" C! the other 47 some are pro%a%l' wea5ened a %it as in <t" /;9DN <5" -49/N .o" -B9--" It is onl' in the +ospels and the Apocal'pse (== and -B respectivel') that 3 occurs with !re8uenc'" It is interestin$ to o%serve that on this point <oulton $ets the +ospels and Revelation in harmon' with the pap'ri %' eliminatin$ the >L passa$es due to Semitic in!luence" C!" +ildersleeve (2. 3. P. iii /L/ !!") and 6allentine (ib. (viii 7;4 !!")" 6ut Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" ->/) e(plains <t" /79/- =;35 3 4 $ not as a He%raism %ut as a )%ar%arism* li5e the :essele' Pap'rus ((vi 35 3 4 $ $@" He 8uotes also Pap" Lu$d" II p" -L> D * q' $@C' 3 4 !D#" C!" 3 4 )G (Rev" /9--)N 3 4 0! (<t" -=9//)" There is a clima( in Rev" >9-= 3;3;3+ 4 !q" Even 3 was not stron$ enou$h sometimes so that we have 3 and 3 in He%" -49; 3 !# )& 35 3 !# $" So also 3+ 3 4 )!# (Lu" -L9-D)" In <5" -49/ we have 3 in %oth the principal and the su%ordinate (relative) clause" I'. Interrogative Particles (# ). It is not the mode that we have under discussion here %ut simpl' the particles used in the various !orms o! 8uestions"-" SI&+LE TAESTIC&S" #a$ $irect ( estions. (i) No Particle at all. So !@# - 9( (<t" -49;-)" So -49/B and ver' o!ten" Here the in8uir' is colourless e(cept as the tone o! voice or conte(t ma' indicate oneKs attitude" In !act most interro$ative sentences have no interro$ative word at all" C!" Lu" -49/N .o" >9/4N -49=N Ac" /-94> etc" Hence it is sometimes a matter o! dou%t whether a sentence is interro$ative or declarative" C!" .o" -=94-N Ro" B944N -79//N - Cor" -9-4N / Cor" 49-N He%" -L9/N .as" /97 etc" It ma' %e dou%t!ul also at what point the 8uestion ends" C!" .o" >9-DN Ro" 79-" :iner/ ri$htl' sa's that on this point $rammar cannot spea5" (ii) The Use of Negative Particles. The' are used to indicate the 5ind o! answer e(pected" This su%0ect has alread' had su!!icient discussion" See under 3 and _ n3 e(pects the answer J'esK (c!" <t" >9//) and the answer JnoK (c!" .o" >94-)" In .o" -B94> we have 3- accordin$ to :" H" which has lost its ne$ative !orce %ut 7@ would preserve it" Pro%a%l' Pilate was hardl' read' to $o that !ar unless in 0est" The use o! varies $reatl' in tone" The precise emotion in each case (protest indi$nation scorn e(citement s'mpath' etc") depends on the conte(t" C!" .o" 79/DN =9=>N >97>N Lu" =94DN Ro" -L9-BN --9-" In .o" 49-L the !irst part o! the 8uestion has no ne$ative and the second part has 3" (iii) Other Particles. There are not man'" There is (a5in to root o! )JJ! Jto 0oinK) an illative particle which occurs with 3 as in Ac" /-94B as in / Cor" -9-> or with ' as in <t" -B9-" This classic use is not strictl' interro$ative %ut illative
:e&&ele! :E
ELEF,

0., @ie lat" Elemente in d" +rEcitEt d" E$'pt" Ea". (:ien. t-d., HHi1, 190#).

***, Lit" der Pap'rus5unde (Stud" ,ur PalEo$r" und Pap" I, 1901, "". 17$#0A II, 190#, "". 52$ 4#). ***, Prole$" ad pap'rorum $raecorum novam collectionem edendam (1882). 1 0/. :.8,+., "". 408 //.A Ro?ert&on, +ort Gr., "". 177 //. # :.8,+., ". 408.

in the interro$ative sentence" 6ut Q !rom the same root- with more vocal stress is interro$ative" Indeed it is sometimes dou%t!ul which accent is correct as in +al" /9-> where Q is pro%a%l' correct" In Ro" -79-D however :" H" $ive " :e have Q in Lu" -B9B and Q9 $# in Ac" B94L" | loo5s %ac5ward Q !orward" 6ut the accent is a 8uestion o! editin$" The use o! #< in direct 8uestions is either a He%raism/ or involves ellipsis" C!" <t" -/9-L #< 0[#! C' !9TT! ##"#( So also -D94" It is common in the LXX (c!" +en" ->9->) %ut is !orei$n to the old +ree5" The classic +ree5 however did use #< in indirect 8uestions and this !act ma' have made it easier !or the direct use o! #< to arise" Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" -4=) ta5es this #<}W" The &" T" does not use W %ut the pap'ri have it9 W # TD9~ W 68 @D9( P" #a'" -4> (iMA"@")" So the 8uestion to the oracle" (iv) Interrogative Pronouns. The most common in the &" T" is ' (c!" <t" 49>)" Cther words are !re8uentl' added as (/797;)N $9 (D9;)N (Lu" 49-L)" The various uses o! as adver% (<5" -L9-B Lu" -=9/)N with prepositions as * (<t" D9--) and #<' (<5" -797) or D9 ' (- .o" 49-/)N or ellipticall' as : (Lu" /97D) and = (<t" D97) need not detain us" The dou%le interro$ative ' appears in <5" -;9/7" 6oth ' and C' occur in - Pet" -9--" #or A' see <t" B9/> and A!' see -;947" :e need not tarr' lon$er on these elementar' details" (v) Interrogative Conjunctions. These are common %esides (as in <5" -L9-B)" The possi%le e(clamator' use o! in Lu" -/97DPJhowK is sustained %' the modern +ree5 9PJhow !ine"K C!" !9' (<t" -B9/-)N A# (/;94B)N e' A# (->9->)N -(Lu" B9/;)N &' (-L9/=)N A# (<t" -49/>) etc" #b$ Indirect ( estions. Here there must %e either a pronoun or a con0unction" (i) Pronouns. The use o! ' 68 is common" C!" <t" =9/;N Lu" D97=N .o" /9/;N Ac" -D94/" :e !ind : so used in Ac" D9= and d apparentl' so in - Tim" -9>" Certainl' bC' occurs in this construction (- Cor" 49-4)" The same thin$ is true o! :!' (<5" ;9-D) and bC' (.as" -9/7)" C!" also C' (<5" --9/D)N A!' (<t" />9-4)N A' (Lu" >94D)N ' (He%" >97) and ,' in +al" =9-- (mar$in o! :" H") i! this readin$ %e accepted" C!" in Ac" -/9-B" (ii) Conjunctions. These are also common as #< (<5" -;977)N A# and - (.o" 49B)N A# (<5" -4944)N &' (- Th" -9D)N :' (Lu" /79/L)N :@ (<5" -79-7)N # (Lu" 49-;) etc" /" @CA6LE TAESTIC&S" These are rare" (i) Direct. There is no instance o! A#;/" :e do have ';/ (<t" D9;N /49->N />9->) the later +ree5 carin$ little !or the dual idea in A#" :e more commonl' have simpl' / with the second part o! the 8uestion and nothin$ in the !irst as in Lu" /L9/ 7N Ro" /94 !" :e ma' have r 7 (<t" //9->) and r (<5" -/9-7)" Sometimes we have simpl' / at the %e$innin$ o! the 8uestion with a re!erence to an implied alternative (- Cor" D9=N / Cor" -9->)" This / ma' come in the middle o! the sentence as in - Cor" D9B" The / ma' even precede ' as in <t" >9D" (ii) Indirect. There is one instance o! A#;/ in an indirect 8uestion (.o" >9->)" '. #on% nctions (!"#! ). In the nature o! the case much had to %e said a%out the con0unctions- in the treatment o! the Sentence and also Su%ordinate Clauses" The s'ntactical principles controllin$ %oth paratactic and h'potactic sentences have received ade8uate discussion" 6ut con0unctions pla' such an important part in the lan$ua$e that it
1 %ann. ('i&t. G). Gr., ". 511) note& t+e "re8Atti( W (. # ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #30.

is %est to $roup them all to$ether" The' connect words clauses sentences and para$raphs and thus !orm the 0oints o! speech" The' have a ver' $ood name since the' %ind to$ether (con%*ungo) the various parts o! speech not otherwise connected i! the' need connection !or as'ndeton is alwa's possi%le to the spea5er or writer" The point here is to interpret each con0unction as !ar as possi%le so that its precise !unction ma' %e clear" -" PARATACTIC/ CC&.A&CTIC&S (!"#! )" #a$ !opulative" Con0unctions which connect words and clauses are evidentl' later in development than the words and clauses" The use o! con0unctions came to %e ver' common in the +ree5 so that the a%sence was noticea%le and was called as'ndeton"- 6ut it is a mista5e to suppose that these connectives are necessar'" Cne ma' !ail to use them as a result o! rapidit' o! thou$ht as the words rush !orth or the' ma' %e consciousl' avoided !or rhetorical e!!ect" C!" T##, T##, T## in Ph" 49/ with Tenn'sonKs )6rea5 %rea5 %rea5"* All this is entirel' within the province o! the spea5er" C!" - Cor" 49-/ D@!A, $@, @' @', [", DA, 9" C!" also - Cor" -497U> where the ver%s !ollow one another in solemn emphasis with no connective save one " In the same wa' contrast ma' %e e(pressed without con0unctions as in - Cor" -;974 !"/ In Lu5e and .ohn there is a pleasin$ alternation o! as'ndeton and con0unctions" C!" +al" ;9//" The !irst con0unctions were the paratactic or co3ordinatin$ since lan$ua$e was ori$inall' in principal sentences"4 The copulative (connectin$) con0unctions are the simplest and earliest t'pe o! the paratactic structure" The' simpl' present the words or clauses as on a par with each other"7 The primitive con0unctions were monos'lla%ic li5e , , "; (i) %" This word appears to %e related to the Sans5rit ca the Latin &ue (with la%io3 velar &u) and the +othic -h"= These words are all enclitic and postpositive" The Sans5rit is almost devoid o! con0unctions which were so hi$hl' developed %' the +ree5 and Latin %ut ca is one o! the !ew possessed %' this ancient ton$ue"> There is a stri5in$ connection %etween &uis &ue &uis%&ue and ', , '" The Thessalian dialect has ' !or ' and !J#" :e have ' # in the old +ree5" % shows this dou%le pronominal ori$in in its use !or and and ever (0ust li5e &ue &uis%&ue)"B The inde!inite use is
1 ,+e di&tin(tion ?etBeen ad1. and (onM. i&, o/ (o-r&e, ar?itrar!. 0onM&. are ad1&. M-&t a& t+e ot+er "arti(le& are. 0/. Ea-l, Erin(i"le& o/ t+e 'i&t. o/ Lan.., ". 503. # N0o8ordinatin.O i& /rom co%ordino, to ran.e to.et+er. 1 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 441. # 0/. :.8,+., ". 428. 2 ;r-.., i?., ". 44#. 5 0/. 0. Eitman, 0onM-n(tion&., ". 4 /.A ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #31. 4 :.8,+., ". 525. 3 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., "". 4#9, 451 /. 7 :+itne!, an&. Gr., ". 517. 8 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 420. 0/. 6.8G., II, "". 423 //.

distinctl' Homeric"D The use o! # #, :' # was old Ionic and continued in Attic tra$ed' as vA' # did in Attic prose" C!" Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" ;)" Indeed some scholars-L hold that the correlative use (;) was the ori$inal one %ut this is dou%t!ul" It seems certain that indicates a somewhat closer unit' than does " This close correlative use is certainl' ver' old" C!" !" 5 $? # in Homer"-- In the &" T" it is rare e(cept in the Acts where it occurs some ->; times" It is common in all parts o! the %oo5 and is thus a su%tle ar$ument !or the unit' o! the wor5 (4e3sections and all)" It is somethin$ additional %ut in intimate relation with the precedin$" :e !ind # alone as in Ac" /944 where LY#' and T? are united %' # C!" also -L9// where a$ain two participles are connected" In /49/7 # !! the chan$e !rom the direct to the indirect discourse is mar5ed %' whereas is used twice %e!ore to 0oin minor phrases" % puts !! on a par with u9!#"- In the same wa' in /L9-- the !irst two participles are 0oined %' and then %oth are related to the ne(t %' " The same idiom occurs in .o" =9-B where # $ives an additional item somewhat apart !rom the ; 0ust %e!ore" In .o" 797- ; are not co3ordinate" introduces the whole sentence and connects the two parts" C!" thus ; in Ac" /94>" 6ut ; is strictl' correlative" C!" the Latin &ue5&ue En$lish as5so" See Ac" /97= where the two participles are co3ordinated" In Ro" -79B we have # !our times in succession with 9" There are here two pairs o! conditions" The parts o! each pair are %alanced care!ull'" The dis0unctive #.#;#.# (c!" - Cor" -/9/=) is at %ottom this same correlative use o! " So as to 7#;7# (<t" -/94/) and #;# (Ac" />9/L)" The use o! ; is also common where there is an inner %ond thou$h no hint is $iven as to the relative value o! the matters united" C!" )D##C' # $#C' (Lu" //9==)N #C # 9!# (Ac" -9-)N #' # $@C#' (B9-/)N #; $# (/-94L)N # ) (/79-;)N o # #$9 (/=9//)N ! # TT9' (Ro" -9-7)N K@@ # & ' (/9D) etc" #or + ; see Ac" D9-; and !or + ;; /=9/L" In .o" 79-- 7#; we reall' have the ; (J%othSandK) construction" C!" Latin non &ue5et" :e even have 7#;7#; in .o" ;94> !" In Ac" />9/L #;# stand to$ether and %oth are parallel to !ollowin$" Per contra we !ind ; in Ac" -D9/ and also 4" The manuscripts o!ten var' %etween and (c!" Ac" 49-LN 79-7 etc")" :e have + $9 (common !rom Aristotle on/) in Ro" -9/= !ollowed %' b' # " In He%" /9-- note + $9;" As a rule # stands a!ter the word or words that are paralleled %ut this is not alwa's so"

9 Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #5#. 10 6.8G., II, ". #53. 11 ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 420. 1 ,+i& (la&&i( idiom i& a mar) o/ L-)eI& literar! &t!le. ;-t in t+e # i& on t+e retreat ?e/ore . %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 501. # 0/. 'ammer, @e % Particulae Asu Herodoteo Thuc'dideo Xenophonteo, 1905, ". 9#.

(ii) " The et'molo$' o! this con0unction is disputed" Curtius4 ma5es it the locative case o! the pronominal stem m, m so that it would ultimatel' come !rom the same root as (&ue)" It would thus mean Jin this respect K Jthis %esides"K 6ru$mann- !inds its ori$inal sense in A' Latin co% cum +othic ga" The idea would then %e Jto$ether with K Jin addition to"K The Ar5adian South Ach\an and C'priote dialects use 9' and 9}" :hatever the ori$in it all comes to the same thin$ in the end" It is %' !ar the most !re8uent o! all the con0unctions or other particles in the &" T" It is so common in !act that <oulton and +eden do not list it in their concordance" This in itsel! is in accord with the later +ree5 idiom as Thum%/ notes in Aristotle and in the modern +ree5 and <oulton4 in the pap'ri" <oulton cites Par" P" -B 0 " ,' 0D# 9!# #<' "! as parallel to <5" -;9/;N .o" 794;" 6ut there can %e little dou%t that the e(treme !ondness !or parata(is in .ohnKs +ospel !or instance is partiall' due to the use o! in the LXX !or the He%rew which )means a hoo5 and resem%les a hoo5 in shape"*7 It was certainl' used to )hoo5* to$ether all sorts o! sentences" There is not the same unit' in the older +ree5 in the matters united as is true o! _ )connects in a

!ree and eas' manner*; and the He%rew still more loosel'" There are three main uses o! which appear in the &" T" as in all +ree5" The 2d*unctive Use #62lso7$" This is possi%l' the ori$inal use thou$h one cannot tell" It is thus li5e the Latin et%iam En$lish too #to$Paddition to somethin$ alread' mentioned and is common enou$h in all sta$es o! the lan$ua$e"= A $ood e(ample o! this use o! is seen in <t" B9D $* $1 A' #< LH [@!" The here points to ChristKs relation to the %o'" The centurion li5e a true soldier does not sa' that he is a man who $ives orders %ut rather one who o%e's them" He has the true militar' spirit and 5nows there!ore how .esus can cure the %o' without $oin$ to see him" The is here ver' si$ni!icant" C!" 7' L#C' in <t" >9-/ where the +olden Rule is applied to ChristKs hearers %' " C!" .o" >94 = R !@ (-/9-L) = H FA" This use o! is more !re8uent in Lu5e than elsewhere in the &"

0-rti-& 0>R,I> , G., Gree) Et!molo.!. # 1ol&. (1883). ***, Studien ,ur $riech" und lat" +rammati5 (1838$1878). 2 G). Et!molo.!. 1 Grie(+. Gr., ". 45#. Mo-lton MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). # 'ellen., ". 1#9. 2 Erol., ". 1#. 5 =arrar, G). !nt., ". 193. 4 %ann., G). Gr., ". 501. 3 0/. M. :. '-m"+re!&, ,+e 0l. Re1., 1897, 1ol. KI, "". 150 //.

T"> C!" )$? (Lu" /L94)N r (Lu" -/97-)N + (-/9;7 ;>)N (- Cor" -;9/D)N $9 (<t" B9D)N * (+al" =9-)N #< (/ Cor" --9-;)N (<t" -L9-B)N 2' (Ac" --9->)N 1' (Ro" -;9>)N E (Ro" =9--)N Z' (Ac" /79= B)N b' (.o" =9--)N 2!"' (- Cor" --9/;)N 9# (- Th" 49-/)N * (Lu" -94;)N * - (Lu" --97D)N )* (/79//) etc" So then in the sense o! JalsoK occurs with nouns pronouns ver%s adver%s con0unctions" It ma' re!er to a word or a clause" C!" ' # 6" +" A" ;4L (iMA"@")" #or the use o! b see the Article and !or !N see Prepositions"- It is common !or to sum up a sentence that precedes" #or the relative and articular participle see the in the sentences in <t" ;94DU74" Here %alances the principal and the su%ordinate clauses" So in the apodosis o! a conditional sentence we !ind as in .o" -79>" C!" He%" >9/= where almost means Jprecisel' K and <t" =9-L where it means J0ust so"K C!" Ro" --9-=" So with d we !ind it in the apodosis (.o" ;9-D)" C!" also a!ter k!# in ;9/=" Sometimes the seems to %e redundant as in Lu" --9- 1' or 2' in - Cor" >9>" :e ma' indeed have (JalsoK) in %oth parts o! the comparison a studied %alancin$ o! the two mem%ers o! the sentence as in <t" -B944 !;2' )$?" So Ro" -9-4 LC 1' C' C' 0#!" See O ;O (Ph" 79-/)" The 2scensive Use #6,ven7$" The notion o! JevenK is an advance on that o! mere addition which is due to the conte(t not to " The thin$ that is added is out o! the ordinar' and rises to a clima( li5e the crescendo in music" C!" Latin adeo" C!" 3 A, )* (Ac" /-9-4N Ro" -49;)" This use o! depends wholl' on the conte(t" C!" <5" -9/> C' #"! C' )9' 9!!#" (So Lu" -L9->)" C!" also R #& and R <t" ;97= !" See !urther Ac" -L97;N --9- /LN +al" /9-4" The use o! #< %elon$s here" (C!" - Cor" B9;") The 8ere !onnective #62nd7$" The di!!erence %etween as JandK and as JalsoK is ver' sli$ht whichever was the ori$inal idea" The epe(e$etic or e(plicative use o! occupies a middle $round %etween JalsoK and Jand"K 6lass/ treats it under Jalso"K C!" Lu" 49-B * e# & where the )connective* !orce o! is certainl' ver' sli$ht" So also .o" /L94L * !#C" See !urther .o" -9-= D9 ) D9' where the clause is an e(planator' addition" C!" (Ac" //9/;) )9 (- Cor" /9/) - !@ (Ro" -49--) - (Latin id&ue) which is our Jand that tooK where we com%ine JandK and JalsoK (JtooK) in the (He%" --9-/) - (!re8uent in ancient +ree5)" See in particular Eph" /9B - 3 [ L& where - re!ers to the whole conception not to D9" The simple copulative idea is however the most common use o! where words are piled to$ether %' means o! this con0unction" Sometimes the connection is as close as with " Thus b #H' (/ Cor" -94)N G )$G (Lu" B9-;)" 6ut the words ma' %e ver' loosel' 0oined in idea as R !C @C (<t" -=9-)" ma' %e used to connect all sorts o! words clauses and sentences" Thus $ D@, 0D# (<t" B9D)" The use o! a!ter the imperative is seen in <t" --9/D" The chain with as the connective ma' $o on inde!initel'" C!" the !our e(amples in Ph" 79DN !ive in Ro" D97N the si( in Rev" >9-/ (so ;9-/)" So we have : three times in - Cor" -;97 ( to connect : clauses)" In Rev" -/U-= ever' para$raph and most o! the sentences
7 A??ott, %o+. Gr., ". 150. 1 0/. <ei&&., ;. .A 'at(+, %o-r. o/ ;i?. Lit., 1908, ". 15#. # Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #32.

%e$in with " In !act it is true o! much o! the Apocal'pse" I! one turns to #irst <acca%ees it is true even to a much $reater e(tent than in the Apocal'pse" In #irst <acca%ees translates the He%rew "6ut Thum%- has !ound this repetition o! in Aristotle so that the He%rew in!luence simpl' intensi!ied a +ree5 idiom" :e have noted the use o! with (; C!" Ro" -9/L)" The use o! ; is !ar more common in the sense o! J%othSandK as in Ac" /9/D ##"!# 9" C!" <5" 797-N Ph" /9-4N Ac" /=9/D" Sometimes the connection almost amounts to Jnot onl' %ut also"K In Col" /9-= note ;/" C!" ; (Lu" -/94B)" A" 6rin5mann contends that in the pap'ri and late +ree5 is sometimes Jat an' rateK and is never a mere lin5 (Scriptio continua und 2nderes Rhein" <us" LXFII 7 -D-/)" In Lu" ;94= we have ;; 3 (so .o" =94=) and in .o" ->9/; 3;+;" It is usual to have 3 a!ter an a!!irmative clause as in .o" -L94;" C!" in / Cor" D9;" See &e$ative Particles" In Lu" -/9= 3 !ollows a 8uestion with 3D_ connects two ne$ative sentences in Lu" =94>" #or 7#; see .o" 79--" Sometimes %e$ins a sentence when the connection is with an une(pressed idea" Children use )and* thus o!ten in tellin$ stories and as5in$ 8uestions" C!" !N W! in <t" /=9=D (and >4) li5e ,t tu 9rute" See also <5" -L9/= ' " !" So also Lu" -L9/DN .o" D94=N / Cor" /9/" C!" also the use o! in parenthesis as in Ro" -9-4 " D - #-" The conte(t $ives other turns to that are sometimes rather startlin$" It is common to !ind where it has to %ear the content Jand 'et"K So .o" 49-DN 79/LN =97DN >94LN - .o" /9D" The e(amples are common in .ohnKs +ospel (A%%ott 3oh. Gr. pp" -4; !!")" See .er" /49/-" In <5" 797 note ;" In - Cor" -L9/- we have 3; in contrast" C!" also <t" 49-7 !N 0Dq A' #( So also Ph" -9// R!" This idiom occurs in Plato and A%%ott notes a num%er o! them in the +ospel o! .ohn" C!" -9;N /9/LN 49-4N ;94D !"N >9/> !"N B9;> etc" In Lu" -/9/7 is almost e8ual to )9 that is the conte(t ma5es contrast" C!" also <t" =9/= (3;)N <5" -/9-/N Lu" /L9-DN .o" -B9/B" Tholuc5- so ta5es in Ro" -9-4 (the parenthetical )" Sometimes seems imitative o! the He%rew %' almost havin$ the sense o! : or = (JthatK) as in <t" /=9-;N <5" -797LN Lu" D9;-N -/9-;" In particular note $# (as in Lu" ;9- -/ -> etc")" In <t" -=9= o%serve bP# " So Lu" -/9-; and <t" /=9-;" In modern +ree5 has so !ar usurped the !ield that it is used not onl' in all sorts o! paratactic senses li5e Jand K J%ut K J!or K Jor K Jand so K %ut even in h'potactic senses !or 9 or - declarative and even consecutive (Thum% "andb. p" -B7)" In <5" 49> comes near ta5in$ the place o! : !or in the ne(t verse there are !ive instances o! co3ordinate with each other %ut su%ordinate to in verse >" Sometimes a!ter we ma' suppl' JsoK as in 9# <t" ;9-;N

1 'ellen., P 1#9. A??ott A;;O,,, E. A., 0l-e. A G-ide t+ro-.+ Gree) to 'e?reB (1905). ***, %o+annine Grammar (1903). ***, %o+annine Go(a?-lar! (1904). ,+ol-() ,'OL>06, 6eitrE$e ,ur Spracher5lErun$ des &" T" 1 6eitr" ,ur Spracher5lErun$ d" &" T", ". 24.

T# He%" 49-D" See also Ph" 79>" This is a 5ind o! consecutive/ use o! " C!" Lu" /79-B" The !ondness !or co3ordination in the +ospels causes the use o! where a temporal con0unction (:#) would %e more usual" C!" <5" -;9/; W k !"! (Lu" /4977)" 6ut 6lass4 admits that this is a classic idiom" C!" <t" /=97;N Lu" -D974 where dri!ts !urther awa' !rom the ancient idiom" C!" also <" in the apodosis Jand %ehold K as in Lu" >9-/" In / Tim" /9/L note !ollowed %' y ;y " In Ph" 79-= note thrice (onePJeven K twoPJ%othSandK)" (iii) V" This con0unction is $enerall' ran5ed wholl' as an adversative particle"7 <onro; sa's9 )The adversative properl' indicates that the new clause stands in some contrast to what has preceded" Crdinaril' however it is used in the continuation o! a narrative"* As a matter o! !act in m' opinion <onro has the matter here turned round" The ordinar' narrative use (continuative) I conceive to %e the ori$inal use the adversative the developed and later construction" The et'molo$' con!irms this e(planation thou$h it is lar$el' con0ectural" 6ru$mann- associates it with the aksl !e and possi%l' also/ with and the enclitic endin$ m 6.J#, :J#, !A'J#8 while H artun$4 connects it with ", ' and 6Eumlein7 with #"J#'" The enclitic m# thus means Ja$ain K J%ac5 K while the con0unction would mean Jin the second placeK or Ja second commentK or Jan important additionK ()" 6ut however we ta5e it there is in the word no essential notion o! antithesis or contrast" :hat is true is that the addition is somethin$ new; and not so closel' associated in thou$ht as is true o! and " I pre!er there!ore to %e$in with the narrative and transitional (copulative) use o! " 12hner3 +erth= call this use o! !or Jsomethin$ newK (et4as 'eues) copulative and $ive it
# ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #3#. 2 I?. 5 o %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 507. 4 'om. Gr., ". #54. 1 Grie(+. Gr., ". 457. # I?. 0/. al&o 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 510. 0/. 6lotz ad <e1., II, ". 244. 'art-n. 'AR,>NG, %. A., Lehre von den Parti5eln der $riech" Spr", I, II (182#$1822). 2 I, ". 143 /. ;C-mlein ;D>MLEIN, Antersuchun$en 2%er die $riech" <odi und die Parti5eln und (1853). ***, Antersuch" 2%er $riech" Parti5eln (1831). 5 Eart., ". 89. 4 :.8,+., ". 552. 67+ner8Gert+ 69'NER8GER,', Aus!" +ramm" d" $riech" Spr" 4" Au!l" o! 12hner" Tl" II 6de" I, II (1898, 1905). 3 II, ". #75.

separate discussion" A%%ott> has the matter correctl'9 )In classical +ree5 callin$ attention to the second o! two thin$s ma' mean (-) in the next place (/) on the other hand"* The !irst o! these uses is the ori$inal one and is copulative" The second is adversative" A%%ott notes also that in %oth senses occurs in <atthew and Lu5e nearl' three times as o!ten as in <ar5 and .ohn" Its use is mainl' in the historical %oo5s o! the &" T" It is so common there that as with <oulton and +eden do not $ive an' re!erences" A $ood place to note the mere copulative !orce o! is in the $enealo$' in <t" -9/U-= where there is no notion o! opposition at all" The line is simpl' counted !rom A%raham to Christ" In verses = and -/ there are %rea5s %ut the contrast is made %' repetition o! the names not %' which appears with ever' name ali5e" In <t" /497 we have %oth uses o! " The !irst is properl' translated J'eaK and the second J%utK (adversative)" See !urther - Cor" 79> ( and + ) where there is a succession o! steps in the same direction" So -;94;N / Cor" =9-; !"N He%" -/9=N and in particular the list o! virtues in / Pet" -9;U>" Sometimes a word is repeated with !or special emphasis as !" in Ro" 49// (c!" D94L)" A new topic ma' %e introduced %' in entire harmon' with the precedin$ discussion as the 6irth o! .esus in <t" -9-B (J&ow the %irth o! .esus Christ K etc")" The use o! in e(planator' parenthesis is seen in .o" 49-D (JAnd this is K etc")N -D9/4 (J&ow the coat K etc")" #or 2' (Jand when K Jso whenK) in .ohn see /9D /4" In .ohn as elsewhere it is sometimes not clear whether is copulative or adversative" C!" 49- W " Is &icodemus an illustration or an e(ception[- The resumptive use o! a!ter a parenthesis to $o on with the main stor' is also copulative" C!" <t" 49-N Lu" 79-" There is continuation not opposition in the use o! as in Lu" -9>= !N where means JandK and JalsoK C!" !urther <t" -L9-BN -=9-BN .o" -;9/>" In .o" =9;- we have in the apodosis o! the condition in this sense" V is alwa's postpositive and ma' even occup' the third place in the sentence (<t" -L9--) or even the !ourth (.o" =9;-) or !i!th (- .o" /9/) or si(th (Test" (iii Patr" .ud" D9-) as shown in chapter on Sentence" In accord with the copulative use o! we !re8uentl' have 3 and in the continuative sense carr'in$ on the ne$ative with no idea o! contrast" C!" <t" =9/= 3 !#@! 3+ #F@! 3+ !@9$@!" So also =9/BN <5" 79// etc" In .o" >9; 3+ $9 we have 3 in the sense o! Jnot evenK as o!ten (<t" =9/D etc")" In <t" =9-; 3 means Jnot alsoK (c!" also /-9/> etc")" All three uses o! are thus paralleled in 3 (merel' 3 )" #or in the continuative sense see <t" >9=" It means Jnot evenK in - Cor" ;9--" #or the repetition o! continuative see - Cor" -L9>U-L" In <5" -79=B 7# O 7# ! (some <SS" 3;3) we come prett' close to havin$ 7# ;7# in the merel' continuative sense as we have in 7#; (.o" 79--N 4 .o" -L)" (iv) g9" Here there is no dou%t at all as to the et'molo$'" g9 is a virtual proclitic (c!" 0 and ) and the neuter plural was )9 ( Jother thin$sK)" 6Eumlein/ does ta5e )9 as ori$inall' an adver%" 6ut in realit' it is Jthis other matterK4
7 %o+. Gr., ". 105. 0+ri&t 0'RI ,, :., +eschichte der $riech" Literatur %is au! die Oeit .ustinians" 7" Au!l" (-DL;)" ;" Au!l" (1912). 1 0/. A??ott, %o+. Gr., ". 104. # >nter&. 2%er $riech" Parti5eln, ". 7. 2 Eale!, G). Earti(le&, ". 1.

(c!" - and -)" In actual usa$e the adversative came to %e the most !re8uent construction %ut the ori$inal copulative held on to the &" T" period" It is a mista5e to in!er that ' means Jsomethin$ di!!erent"K In itsel! it is merel' Janother"K Li5e the thin$ introduced %' )9 is somethin$ new %ut not essentiall' in contrast"7 So the classic +ree5 used )* in the emphatic continuative sense"; 6lass= o%serves that )the simple )9 also has this !orce o! introducin$ an accessor' idea"* C!" / Cor" >9-A! #$9! LC !@, )* )$, )* )$9!, )* AT, )* A!, )* F, )* !" All these si( e(amples are con!irmator' and continuative" See !urther Lu" /79/- )9 $# !N P! "' where it is climacteric not contradictor'" The stor' is carried on %' )* in verse //" C!" also / Cor" -9DN Lu" -/9>N -=9/-" In Ph" -9-B D, )* D! the connection is ver' close" The most stri5in$ e(ample o! all is Ph" 49B )* #-$# ,$-" In / Cor" --9- )* )D#!# the tone o! iron' ma5es it dou%t!ul whether to ta5e )9 as copulative or adversative" These and similar passa$es are not a droppin$ o! the adversative idea %ut merel' the retention o! the ori$inal copulative meanin$" A%%ott- sees that )it is hard to !ind a satis!actor' e(planation o! .o" B9/=* alon$ the usual line" I! one no lon$er !eels impelled to translate %' J%ut K the trou%le vanishes" .ust ma5e it JnowK or J'eaK and it is clear" A%%ott/ li5ewise considers )9 )ine(plica%le* in 79/4 %ecause it has to mean J%ut"K C!" .o" -=9/ )5 0D# k J'ea the hour comes"K The same use o! )9 occurs also in ne$ative sentences" In Cor" 494 )5 3+ - "!# a!ter 7 "!#" In 794 )5 3 a!ter an a!!irmative clause" In Ac" -D9/ )5 35 the thou$ht answers the precedin$ 8uestion and is pro%a%l' adversative as is possi%le in - Cor" 494" The )9 at an' rate is ne$ative li5e the 3" So as to )5 3+ ' (Lu" /49-;)" #b$ 2dversative" It should %e stated a$ain that not all o! these con0unctions mean contrast (antithesis) or opposition %ut the conte(t ma5es the matter clear" The modern +ree5 5eeps )9, :', %ut not and (Thum% "andb. p" -B;)"
5 6.8G., II, ". #83. 4 I?. 3 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #39. 1 %o+. Gr., ". 100. # I?., ". 99. ,+-m? ,'>M;, A., @ie #orsch" 2%er die hellen" Spr" in den .ahren 190#$1905 (Ar(+. /. Ea". 2, "". 552$ 572). ***, @ie $riech" Sprache im Oeitalter des Hellenismus (1901). ***, @ie sprach$esch" Stell" des %i%l" +riech" (,+eol. R-nd., 190#). ***, Hand%uch der $riech" <ial. (1909). ***, Hand%uch d" neu$riech" Fol5ssprache" /" Au!l" (1910). ***, Hand%uch des Sans5rits. I, Grammati) (1904).

(i) V" In .as" -9-4 !" note the two uses o! (continuative and adversative)" Sometimes the positive and the ne$ative are sharpl' contrasted and then is clearl' adversative as in <t" /497 3 + 3 @!" <ore o%vious still is =9-7 !" * )#;* + 4 )#" C!" also =9/4" So 4 !@F##;!@F## (=9-D !")" C!" - Cor" -9-L etc" The contrast ma' lie in the nature o! the case particularl' where persons stand in contrast as in $1 (<t" ;9// /B 4/ etc") !N (<t" =9=N - Tim" =9--)N ,#C' (- Cor" -9/4)N L#C' (<5" B9/D)N the common b (<5" -97;) R (<t" /9;)N 3H' (Lu" B94>) 3H' + K!-' (.o" /9/7) etc" The contrast is made more mani!est %' the use o! (see Intensive Particles) as in <t" 49--" In - Cor" /9= ! + 3 - <&' "@ an e(ception is !iled to the precedin$" This adversative use o! is ver' common indeed" C!" !urther <5" /9-BN Lu" ;9;N D9D -4N /79/-N Ac" -/9-;N Ro" B9D !!" (ii) g9" .ust as ' (c!" / Cor" --97) can %e used in the sense o! e#' (when it means Jdi!!erent K not merel' JsecondK) so )9 can mean JanotherK in contrast to the precedin$" :ith a ne$ative the antithesis is sharp as in Lu" -9=L 3D, )* !# K9'" So .o" =94/ 3 a@!';)5 b (c!" =94B)" C!" <5" D94>N - Cor" -;94>" In verse 4D o! - Cor" -; note )* ; where %oth )9 and have the notion o! di!!erence due to the conte(t" In - Cor" D9-/ note )9 twice" In <t" -;9-3 %e$ins one clause and )9 the other" C!" / Cor" 79; 3 $* u@N' "!!#, )* h!H K!- "" So <t" ;9->" In Lu" -/9;- note 3D, )5 / and in / Cor" -9-4 ;)5 / a sort o! pleonastic use o! )9" This is a classical idiom"- C!" also 3 A;)9 (Ac" -D9/=) or )* (Ro" ;94)" See &e$ative Particles" #or 3D S ;)9 see .o" >9// !or 3D =;)9 see =94B" #or )9 $# in apodosis see - Cor" D9/ !or )9 Col" /9; !or )5 3 - Cor" 79-;" Sometimes )5 = ma' %e elliptical as in <5" -797DN .o" -9B" g9 alone ma' re!er to an interruption in thou$ht not e(pressed as in .o" -/9/>" Cne o! the most stri5in$ instances o! )9 occurs in Ac" -=94> 3 $9, )9 where 3 $9 means Jnot muchK with !ine scorn (c!" -( 0ust %e!ore)" 6oth :iner and :" #" <oulton (:"3<" p" ;==) !elt certain that )9 never e8ualled #< not even in <t" /L9/4 and <5" 79//" 6ut ." H" <oulton (Prol. p" /7-) 8uotes T%" P" -L7 (iM6"C") 4 [! ! $@C $$! )* g
***, Anters" 2%er d" Sp" Asper im +riech" (1889). 1 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #39. Mo-lton MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). Mo-lton MO>L,ON, %. '., A Grammar o/ N. ,. Gree). Gol. I, Erole.omena (1903). 2d ed. (1908). ***, 0+ara(teri&ti(& o/ N. ,. Gree) (,+e EH"o&itor, 1905). ***, Einleitun$ in die Sprache des &" T" (1911). ***, Grammati(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&itor, 1901, "". #71$#8#A 1902, "". 105$1#1, 5#2$529. ,+e 0la&&i(al Re1ieB, 1901, "". 21$27, 525$551A 1905, "". 103$ 11#, 141$144). ***, Introd-(tion to N. ,. Gree) (1894). #d ed. (1905).

where )9 means practicall' Je(cept"K See also +en" /-9/=" <oulton su$$ests that since #< (%rach'lo$') in Lu" 79/= !"N Rev" /-9/> means J%ut onl' K the same ma' %e true o! )9" (iii) " Curtius $ets it !rom (JmoreK) %ut 6ru$mann/ !inds its ori$inal meanin$ to %e Jnear %'"K At an' rate it was a preposition (<5" -/94/)" C!" Ac" -;9/B 4 " where the two words e(ist to$ether" Pro%a%l' its ori$inal use as a con0unction is seen in the com%ination 4 : (Ph" -9-B)" It is chie!l' con!ined to Lu5eKs writin$s in the &" T" As a con0unction it is alwa's adversative (c!" Lu" =9/7N -/94- etc")" In <t" /=94D note 4 3D 2';)5 2'" The classical lan$ua$e used it as a preposition and with : %ut Aristotle4 shows the e(istence o! as a con0unction

***, Lan.-a.e o/ 0+ri&t ('a&tin.&I One81ol. <. ;., 1909). ***, N. ,. Gree) in t+e Li.+t o/ Modern <i&(o1er! (0am?r. ;i?l. E&&a!&, 1909, "". 531$ 404). ***, ,+e (ien(e o/ Lan.-a.e (1902). Mo-lton MO>L,ON, %. '., A Grammar o/ N. ,. Gree). Gol. I, Erole.omena (1903). 2d ed. (1908). ***, 0+ara(teri&ti(& o/ N. ,. Gree) (,+e EH"o&itor, 1905). ***, Einleitun$ in die Sprache des &" T" (1911). ***, Grammati(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&itor, 1901, "". #71$#8#A 1902, "". 105$1#1, 5#2$529. ,+e 0la&&i(al Re1ieB, 1901, "". 21$27, 525$551A 1905, "". 103$ 11#, 141$144). ***, Introd-(tion to N. ,. Gree) (1894). #d ed. (1905). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ 0+ri&t ('a&tin.&I One81ol. <. ;., 1909). ***, N. ,. Gree) in t+e Li.+t o/ Modern <i&(o1er! (0am?r. ;i?l. E&&a!&, 1909, "". 531$ 404). ***, ,+e (ien(e o/ Lan.-a.e (1902). MO>L,ON, :. =., and GE<EN, A. ., A 0on(ordan(e to t+e Gree) ,e&tament (1897). MO>L,ON and MILLIGAN, LeHi(al Note& /rom t+e Ea"!ri (,+e EH"o&., 1908*). ***, ,+e Go(a?-lar! o/ t+e N. ,. Ill-&trated /rom t+e Ea"!ri and ot+er Non8Literar! o-r(e&. Eart I (1915), II, III. 0-rti-& 0>R,I> , G., Gree) Et!molo.!. # 1ol&. (1883). ***, Studien ,ur $riech" und lat" +rammati5 (1838$1878). ;r-.mann

which developed in the vernacular" 6lass7 notes that Paul uses it at the end o! an ar$ument to sin$le out the main point" C!" - Cor" --9--N Eph" ;944N Ph" 49-=N 79-7" (iv) a" This word is a com%ination o! two intensive particles (, ) and is used to mean Jhowever"K C!" .o" 79/>N -/97/" It occurs in the &" T" onl' ei$ht times" (v) l'" This word is even more rare than " It occurs with two participles (Cor" -79>N +al" 49-;) and once with (.o" -/97/)" (vi) \< " This phrase mar5s an e(ception as in <t" -/97N .o" ->9-/" :e even have H' #< (- Cor" -79;N -;9/N - Tim" ;9-D)" #c$ Dis*unctives" @ion'sius Thra( calls this construction !"#!' F#@" It was alwa's possi%le to e(press alternative ideas without an' con0unction (c!" the Latin nolens volens) or %' copulative con0unctions (, ) a construction common in the

vernacular- (c!" He%rew @ ")issimilar thin$s ma' %e united %' as in Col" 49-- %ut we do not have to ta5e as %ein$ / or vice versa"/ (i) " Its ori$in !rom ] (enclitic) is held %' 6ru$mann"4 The' are e8uivalent in Homer" :e ma' have 0ust / as in <t" ;9->" #or r see <t" >9-LN Lu" -B9--" In the sense o! JorK / ma' %e repeated inde!initel' (Ro" B94;)" In Ro" -9/- we have 3D;/ as in 79-4" See ;;/ (Ro" D9--)" This use in ne$ative clauses appears in Thuc" -// and later writers" In - Th" /9-D note r 3D " In <t" /-9/4 we have ' while in Lu" /L9/ (parallel passa$e) the readin$ is r '" This does not prove and / to %e s'non'mous" The lo$ion was translated di!!erentl'" The modern +ree5 retains 7#, # and / (Thum% "andb. p" -B;)" In - Cor" --9/> Z' w !q H r q H - @@ some <SS" have %ut / is the true te(t" This however does not mean that some partoo5 o! one element and some o! the other %ut that whatever element was ta5en in this wa' there was $uilt" The correlative use o! /;/ (JeitherSorK) is also !re8uent"7 C!" <t" =9/7N - Cor" -79=" In Ro" =9-= note /;/" As a dis0unctive we have A#;/ in .o" >9-> and /;/;/;/ in <5" -494;" #or / see <t" -9-BN
;R>GMANN, 6., Element& o/ 0om"arati1e Grammar o/ t+e Indo8Germani( Lan.-a.e& (tran&lation ?! :ri.+t, 1894). ***, +riechische +rammati5" 4" Au!l" (1900), t+e ed. @-oted. Fierte vermehrte Au!l" o/ A. ,+-m? (1912). ***, +rundriG der ver$l" +r" d" indo$" Sprachen" /" Au!l" 6de" I, II (1897$1912). ***, 1ur,e ver$leichende +rammati5 der indo$ermanischen Sprachen (1905). # Grie(+. Gr., ". 440. 2 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #38. 5 I?. 1 %ann., 'i&t. G). Gr., ". 503. # :.8,+., ". 550. 2 Grie(+. Gr., ". 451. 5 0/. Mar.oli&, ,+e Earti(le / in O. ,. G). (Am. %o-r. o/ em. Lan.. and Lit., %-l!, 1909).

!or / a!ter see - Cor" -79-DN a!ter A <t" -B9BN a!ter D9 Lu" -;9>N !or )5 / Lu" -/9;-" Radermacher ('. T. Gr. p" />) !inds / ;/ 6" +" A" D;=N / ;/ Fett" Fal" p" -4B --N /#;/ I" +" XII / ;=/ ; (Roman time)N /#;/# :uaest. 9arth. pp" /7 4L" (ii) \.#;#.# 69#;9#8" These conditional particles are li5e the Latin sive5 sive" C!" - Cor" -L94- #.#;#.#;#.#" So -/9-4N -79>" :e have #.# ei$ht times in 49//" In -79> it !ollows /;/ in verse =" #or 9#;9# see Ro" -79B" (iii) n7#;n7# 6#;#8" :e have seen that there is nothin$ inherent in 7# to ma5e it dis0unctive" C!" .o" 79--N 4 .o" -L" It is simpl' 3 and (c!" 3 ) a ne$ative copulative con0unction" In Rev" ;94 !" we have 3;7# (c!" +al" -9-/) and the ne(t verse 3#';7#" In Ac" /79-/ !" we have 7#;7#;7#;3" C!" Lu" /L94; !" In .o" ;94> !" note 7#;7#; 3" In - Cor" =9-L note 7#;7#;3;3" In .as" 49-/ c!" 7# a!ter 8uestion" A $ood e(ample o! the correlative 7#;7# is - Cor" 49>" In Ro" B94B !" 7# occurs ten times" In Ac" /49B we !ind ;#;#" This is also 0ust a copulative ne$ative con0unction ( #)" In <t" ;947U4= we have ;#;# ;#;#" In / Th" /9/ we have ;#;#" In Lu" >944 ;# while in D94 is !ollowed %' # !ive times" There is o!ten some con!usion in the <SS" %etween and #, 3 and 7#" 6lass- re0ects 7# O 7# ! in <5" -79=B ( .6@L) %ut on whimsical $rounds" #d$ -n+erential !on*unctions" It is not eas' to draw a distinction %etween )in!erential* and )causal"* There is no dou%t a%out and " These are in!erential paratactic particles" :hat a%out $9[ <onro/ calls it causal" 12hner3+erth4 treat all three as causal" Perhaps it is 0ust as well to reserve the term )causal* !or the h'potactic particles :, # etc" Cne has to %e ar%itrar' sometimes" And even so these particles (, , $9) were ori$inall' 0ust transitional or e(planator' in sense" 6lass7 calls them )consecutive* co3ordinate con0unctions" (i) |" The et'molo$' seems to %e clear thou$h not accepted %' all scholars" The root )m ()m m ! Jto !itK) suits e(actl'"; It means then J!ittin$l' accordin$l'"K C!" our )articulate* (ar%ticulus)" The word e(presses some sort o! correspondence %etween the sentences or clauses" It was postpositive in the ancient +ree5 %ut in the &" T" it is not alwa's so" C!" <t" -/9/BN Ac" ->9/>" It occurs some ;L times in the &" T" in <atthew <ar5 Lu5e Acts PaulKs Epistles and He%rews" The ori$inal notion o! mere correspondence is apparentl' preserved in Lu" --97B 9@' !# Jso 'e are
Raderma(+er RA<ERMA0'ER, L., &eut" +rammati5" @as +riechisch des &" T" im Ousammenhan$ mit der Fol5ssprache (1911). 1 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #34. Monro MONRO, <. ;., 'omeri( Grammar (188#). #d ed. (1891). =ir&t ed. -&ed. # 'om. Gr., ". #42. 67+ner8Gert+ 69'NER8GER,', Aus!" +ramm" d" $riech" Spr" 4" Au!l" o! 12hner" Tl" II 6de" I, II (1898, 1905). 2 II, ". 217. 5 Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #7#. 4 0/. 6.8G., II, ". 217 /., /or t+e di&(-&&ion o/ t+e t+eorie&. o ;r-.., Grie(+. Gr., ". 429.

witnesses"K C!" also Ac" --9-B" In <5" --9-4N Ac" ->9/> #< has the idea o! Ji! hapl'"K 1lot, ta5es to descri%e the une(pected and stran$e somethin$ e(trinsic while 6Eumlein considers it a particle $ivin$ point to what is immediatel' and necessaril' conclusive" <ost o! the &" T" instances seem to %e clearl' illative" C!" <t" ->9/= !"N Ro" >9/-" It has $# added three times (c!" <t" >9/LN ->9/= !"N Ac" ->9/>)" Paul is speciall' !ond o! (Ro" ;9-BN >94 /; etc")" Cnce he has - (Ro" B9-)" | occurs also in the apodosis (<t" -/9/BN +al" /9/-)" :e have in a 8uestion in / Cor" -9->" (ii) I9" There is no dou%t as to the ori$in o! this word" It is a compound o! $ and and is alwa's postpositive" It is called !"#!' <$A' %ut it does not alwa's $ive a reason" It ma' %e merel' e(planator'" :e have seen that itsel! was ori$inall' 0ust correspondence and then later in!erence" So then $ can accent as an intensive particle either o! these ideas" It is a mista5e there!ore to approach the stud' o! $9 with the theor' that it is alwa's or properl' an illative not to sa' causal particle" It is %est in !act to note the e(planator' use !irst" Tha'er wron$l' calls the illative use the primar' one" The word is common in all the lar$er %oo5s o! the &" T" It is least common in the +ospel o! .ohn and in Revelation" In <atthew and Lu5e it is much more !re8uent in the discourses and is rare in the strict narrative" In <ar5 and .ohn it is a%out hal! and hal!"- In $eneral the &" T" use o! $9 is in accord with that o! the classic period" The e(planator' use is common in Homer"/ The &" T" e(amples are numerous" C!" <t" -D9-/N <5" ;97/N -=97N Lu" --94LN -B94/" Here the e(planation !ollows immediatel'" Sometimes the e(planation comes in %' wa' o! appendi( to the train o! thou$ht" So <t" 79-B W! $* U#C'" C!" also <5" /9-;N Ro" >9/" In 8uestions we have $ood e(amples particularl' $9" So <t" />9/4 $* H !#( C!" Ro" 494" In Ac" -=94> 3 $9, )9 we have to resolve $9 into its parts and ma5e the phrasePJnot much %ut"K In .o" D94L " $9 the man uses $9 with !ine scorn Jwh' 0ust in this K etc" In .o" -D9= it is hardl' credita%le to PilateKs common sense to ta5e $9 as illative" C!" also .o" >97-N Ac" -D94;N <t" D9;" I9 sometimes $ives the ma0or premise (<t" /=9;/) more o!ten the minor premise (/ Pet" -9-; !") sometimes %oth (.o" 49-D !")" The purel' illative use o! $9 is simple enou$h thou$h the !orce o! the $round or reason naturall' varies $reatl'" See <t" -9/- 3H' $* !?!#N (=9/7) r $9N (Ro" B9-B) $F $9" Paul %e$ins ever' sentence with $9 in Ro" B9-BU/7" #or $9 see Ro" --9-N -;94" The precise relation %etween clauses or sentences is not set !orth %' $9" That must %e $athered !rom the conte(t i! possi%le" C!" .o" 7977" &ote $9;: in - Tim" =9>"

;C-mlein ;D>MLEIN, Antersuchun$en 2%er die $riech" <odi und die Parti5eln und (1853). ***, Antersuch" 2%er $riech" Parti5eln (1831). ,+a!er ,'AFER, %. '., Gree)8En.li&+ LeHi(on o/ t+e N. ,. (1887). ***, Lan.-a.e o/ t+e N. ,. ('a&tin.&I <. ;., 1900). 1 A??ott, %o+. Gr., ". 10#. # Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #42.

(iii) n" The et'molo$' o! n is un5nown" 6ru$mann- thin5s it pro%a%le that it is derived !rom b or b b (c!" S', o S)" The Ionic also has M (so Les%ian @oric 6Qotian)" 6ut however that ma' %e it is important to note that the particle is not illative nor even conse8uential in Homer"/ It is merel' a transitional particle relatin$ clauses or sentences loosel' to$ether %' wa' o! con!irmation" It was common in this sense in Homer thou$h rare in the Attic writers save in + " 6ut it is ver' !re8uent in the +ospel o! .ohn as a mere transitional particle" In this +ospel it occurs a%out /LL times nearl' as !re8uent as all the rest o! the &" T" thou$h it is rare in the other .ohannine writin$s" In .ohnKs +ospel outside o! B e(amples in the words o! .esus the rest occur in the narrative portion"4 A%%ott7 seems pu,,led over the man' non3illative instances o! in .ohn and su$$ests that )the writer perhaps had in view the o%0ections o! controversialists"* 6ut this is wholl' $ratuitous and needless in the li$ht o! the histor' o! the particle" Pro%a%l' a ma0orit' o! the instances in .ohnKs +ospel are non3illative as in Homer the ori$inal use o! the word"; Lu5e preserves the literar' Attic idiom %' the common use o! + as in Ac" -;94 4L etc" 6ut .ohn %oldl' uses alone and needs no apolo$' !or doin$ so" It 0ust carries alon$ the narrative with no necessar' thou$ht o! cause or result" It is %ecause o! .ohnKs !ree use one o! the commonest particles in the &" T" and is o!tener in the narrative %oo5s than in the epistles"= It is interestin$ in .ohn to ta5e a chapter and note when is merel' continuative and when illative" C!" ch" -- !or instance verses 4 = -/ -7 -= -> /L /- 4- 4/ 44 4= 4B 7; 7> ;7 ;=" So we start o!! a$ain in -/9- with b K!-' (continuative)" It is the commonest connective %etween sentences in this +ospel" :e moderns do not !eel the same need !or connectin$3particles %etween independent sentences" The ancient +ree5s loved to point out these delicate nuances" The interro$ative 3- occurs onl' in .o" -B94>" A $ood instance o! the purel' illative use is in <t" 49B !# A" It is common in PaulKs Epistles (Ro" ;9-N =9-/ etc")" Paul is !ond also o! (Ro" B9-/) and o! (=9- -;N >9>N B94- etc")" n is alwa's postpositive" /" H]PCTACTIC CC&.A&CTIC&S (!"#! L)" The con0unctions used in the &" T" with su%ordinate clauses have %een discussed and the constructions $iven in detail alread'" See <odes (Su%ordinate Clauses)" The relative temporal comparative local causal !inal and consecutive apprehensive conditional and declarative
1 Grie(+. Gr., ". 459. # Monro, 'om. Gr., ". #44. 2 A??ott, %o+. Gr., ". 134. A??ott A;;O,,, E. A., 0l-e. A G-ide t+ro-.+ Gree) to 'e?reB (1905). ***, %o+annine Grammar (1903). ***, %o+annine Go(a?-lar! (1904). 5 I?., ". 138. 4 0/. 6.8G., II, ". 2#3. ee al&o :e!mo-t+, A"". A, Renderin. into En.. o/ t+e G). Aori&t and Eer/e(t, 1895. 3 ;la&&, Gr. o/ N. ,. G)., ". #7#.

con0unctions ma5e a $oodl' list" 6ut it is not necessar' to $o over the same $round a$ain" <ost o! these con0unctions as previousl' shown are o! relative ori$in"- All are adver%s" It was necessar' to treat at len$th the paratactic con0unctions which antedate the h'potactic in ori$in and were alwa's e(ceedin$l' a%undant in the vernacular" The h'potactic %elon$ to the more hi$hl' developed speech %ut one must not thin5 that the h'potactic con0unctions re$ulate the construction o! the sentence" The' $et their meanin$ !rom the sentence not the sentence !rom the con0unction" The other view is a mechanical theor' o! lan$ua$e out o! harmon' with the historical $rowth o! %oth mode and particle"/ H'pota(is $rew out o! parata(is" This paratactic ori$in survives in man' wa's" C!" !or instance the relative at the %e$innin$ o! sentences as v' (Lu" -/9-)" So also : in - .o" 49-- !" The +ree5 is particularl' rich in its su%ordinatin$ con0unctions as compared with the Sans5rit and the He%rew" Each su%ordinate clause possesses a case3relation toward the principal sentence as su%stantive ad0ective or adver% so that the sentence e(pansion is on the lines o! the word3relations" In $eneral the disappearance o! the ancient +ree5 con0unctions !rom the modern +ree5 is noticea%le" A# 6bA8, D', D', #<, 5 z )have entirel' disappeared* (Thum% "andb. p" -B=)" Thum% $oes on with the stor'" :e have 2' in !9 and k!# 9PJuntil"K l is $one %e!ore - and 9 thou$h :' has revived" `9 has $reatl' e(tended its !unctions" Some survive $reatl' modi!ied li5e )-, 9, #.#;#.#, o, #, , 2' - 6e'8, - 6:@8, - etc" The paratactic con0unctions are )pressed into service to !orm dependent clauses* as at the %e$innin$" Parata(is turns into h'pota(is" 'I. Inter%ections. :iner- considers inter0ections to %e mere sounds and so entirel' outside o! the sphere o! s'nta( and indeed o! $rammar" 6ut one/ o! the imperatival !orms ($#) is e(clamator' in ori$in" Cr is the inter0ection an imperative in ori$in[ :e see this !orm still used as an inter0ection in .as" 79-4" So also .# in .o" -9/D .# b ' - #-" C!" #- (<5" -L9/-) #-# (<t" --9/B)" V#- is ver' vivid in .o" --974 9F# #- 0[_ K" is either used a%solutel' (<t" --9-L) or with the nominative (Rev" 79-) and is o! !re8uent occurrence" <" is $ood +ree5 %ut its !re8uenc' reminds one o! the He%rew idiom" :e have 0 in Lu" 7947" Cnce 39 occurs (<5" -;9/D) with the vocative" So 3 is !ound with the vocative in Lu" =9/;" It is !ound a%solutel' in Rev" -B9-L -= -D 3, 3" Twice it is used with the accusative (Rev" B9-4N -/9-/) as the o%0ect o! thou$ht" Asuall' the dative is !ound with 3 as in <t" --9/-N Lu" =9/7 !"N --97/" The word occurs mainl' in <atthew and Lu5e" Sometimes we have M with the vocative as in <t" -;9/B M $"" So Ac" -49-LN Ro" /9-N +al" 49-"
1 On t+e relati1e ori.in o/ (onM&. li)e :, :#, :', 2', e' &ee ;aron, Le Pronom Relati! et la Con0onction, 1891, "". 94 //. # 0/. Nil&&on, @ie 1ausalsEt,e im +riech" %is Arist. ee al&o Gilder&l., Am. %o-r. o/ E+ilol., 1907, ". 245 /. :iner :INER, G. ;., @e ver%orum cum praep" compos" in &" T" Asu (1825$1852). ***, +ramm" d" neut" Sprachidioms (-B//)" >" Au!l" von L2nemann (l837). 1 :.8,+., ". 243. # 0/. Mo-lton, Erol., ". 171 /.

There is usuall' some vehemence or ur$enc' when M is used" 6ut not alwa's" See Ac" -9-N -B9-7" In Ro" -L9-; 2' is an e(clamator' particle as is in Lu" -/97D" It is not 8uite true there!ore to sa' that inter0ections lie 8uite outside o! $rammar" Indeed lan$ua$e ma' come !rom 0ust these e0aculator' sounds li5e )mama* with the %a%e" Tra$edians4 naturall' use inter0ections more !re8uentl'" People di!!er $reatl' in the use o! )Ch* and )Ah"* The En$lish audiences arc !ond o! )Hear hear * while the American crowds love to clap their hands or stamp their !eet" #arrar7 !ollows Scali$er and @estutt de Trac' in re$ardin$ them as words par excellence and as havin$ hi$h lin$uistic importance" +rammar can deal with emotion as well as with thou$ht"

2 M7ller, @e inter0ectionum apud Sophoclem Euripidem 8ue Asu, 1884, ". 2. =arrar =ARRAR, =. :., Gree) !ntaH (1873). 5 G). !nt., ". #01.